Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-14-23 City Commission Meeting Agenda & Packet MaterialsA.Call to Order - 6:00 PM - Commission Room, City Hall, 121 North Rouse B.Pledge of Allegiance and a Moment of Silence C.Changes to the Agenda D.Authorize Absence D.1 Authorize the Absence of Mayor Andrus (Maas) E.FYI F.Commission Disclosures G.Consent G.1 Accounts Payable Claims Review and Approval (Waters) G.2 Authorize the City Manager to Sign a Notice of Award for the Cottonwood Road (Oak to THE CITY COMMISSION OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, February 14, 2023 This meeting will be held both in-person and also using Webex, an online videoconferencing system. You can join this meeting: Via Webex: Click the Register link, enter the required information, and click submit. Click Join Now to enter the meeting. Via Phone: This is for listening only if you cannot watch the stream, channel 190, or attend in-person United States Toll +1-650-479-3208 Access code: 2558 509 7042 If you are interested in commenting in writing on items on the agenda please send an email to agenda@bozeman.net prior to 12:00pm on the day of the meeting. Public comments will be accepted in-person during the appropriate agenda items. You may also comment by visiting the Commission's comment page. You can also comment by joining the Webex meeting. If you do join the Webex meeting, we ask you please be patient in helping us work through this hybrid meeting. As always, the meeting will be streamed through the Commission's video page and available in the City on cable channel 190. 1 Baxter) project, to Treasure State, Inc. for Schedule I in the Amount of $7,955,703.50, and Final Contract Documents Once Received(Murray) G.3 Authorize the City Manager to Sign a Conditional Irrevocable Offer of Dedication with WSF LLC for the West Side Flats Phase 2 and 3 Site Plan (22026)(Schultz) G.4 Authorize the City Manager to Sign a Utility Easement with ABS, LLC for the Addison Place Condos (22108)(Ryan) G.5 Authorize the City Manager to Sign a Trail Corridor Easement with Mitchell Development & Investments, LLC for the Bozeman Gateway PUD Phase 5 (22145)(Schultz) G.6 Authorize the City Manager to Sign a Montana Department of Environmental Quality 2022 Stormwater Annual Report Form(Oliver) G.7 Authorize the City Manager to Sign a Professional Services Agreement with Advanced Engineering and Environmental Services, LLC (AE2S) for Water and Wastewater Revenue Adequacy Modeling(Hodnett) G.8 Authorize the City Manager to Sign an Amendment to Terms for the Existing Host Compliance Granicus Vendor Contract(Bentley) G.9 Authorize the City Manager to Sign an Amendment 1 to Task Order 14 with Sanderson Stewart for the Purpose of Right-of-Way Acquisition on the N 19th Avenue Pathway project(Lonsdale) G.10 Authorize the City Manager to Sign a Task Order 8 of the Stormwater Design Professional Services Master Task Order Agreement with DOWL, LLC for the Downtown Mechanical Treatment Project Phase 4(Oliver) G.11 Reconsideration of the Cloverleaf Zone Map Amendment Decision; the Cloverleaf Zone Map Amendment Requested Amending the City Zoning Map for a City Block Bounded by East Cottonwood Street, Ida Avenue, East Peach Street, and Plum Avenue Consisting of Approximately 3.1995 Acres and the Accompanying Adjacent Rights-of way from NEHMU (Northeast Historic Mixed Use) to B-2M (Community Business District Mixed)(Rogers) H.Public Comment This is the time to comment on any matter falling within the scope of the Bozeman City Commission. There will also be time in conjunction with each agenda item for public comment relating to that item but you may only speak once. Please note, the City Commission cannot take action on any item which does not appear on the agenda. All persons addressing the City Commission shall speak in a civil and courteous manner and members of the audience shall be respectful of others. Please state your name and address in an audible tone of voice for the record and limit your comments to three minutes. Written comments can be located in the Public Comment Repository. I.Action Items I.1 1603 Bridger Drive Annexation and Zone Map Amendment Establishing Initial Zoning of R-2 , 2 Residential Moderate Density, for a Property Addressed at 1603 Bridger Drive on Approximately 0.7417 Acres Located North of Bridger Drive Approximately One-third of a Mile East of Story Mill Road, Application 22247(Rogers) I.2 Resolution 5455 Creation of Special Improvement Lighting District 776, Eastlake Professional Center(Hodnett) I.3 Resolution 5457 Creation of Special Improvement Lighting District 777, Billings Clinic Bozeman Campus(Hodnett) I.4 Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) for Fiscal Year 2022 and Audit Results(Hodnett / AZ Representatives) J.Work Session J.1 Parks, Recreation, and Active Transportation Plan Work Session (Jadin) J.2 UDC Project - Review and Advise Regarding the Update to the Unified Development Code, Chapter 38, Bozeman Municipal Code to Address Potential Changes to Standards Relating to Zoning District and Building Transitions; and Commercial and Mixed-Use Zoning Districts, Application 21381(Bentley) K.FYI / Discussion L.Adjournment City Commission meetings are open to all members of the public. If you have a disability that requires assistance, please contact our ADA Coordinator, Mike Gray, at 582-3232 (TDD 582-2301). Commission meetings are televised live on cable channel 190 and streamed live at www.bozeman.net. In order for the City Commission to receive all relevant public comment in time for this City Commission meeting, please submit via www.bozeman.net or by emailing agenda@bozeman.net no later than 12:00 PM on the day of the meeting. Public comment may be made in person at the meeting as well. 3 Memorandum REPORT TO:City Commission FROM:Taylor Chamber, Deputy City Clerk Mike Maas, City Clerk Jeff Mihelich, City Manager SUBJECT:Authorize the Absence of Mayor Andrus MEETING DATE:February 14, 2023 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Administration RECOMMENDATION:I move to authorize the absence of Mayor Andrus STRATEGIC PLAN:1.1 Outreach: Continue to strengthen and innovate in how we deliver information to the community and our partners. BACKGROUND:Mayor Andrus informed Deputy Mayor Cunningham and City Manager Mihelich she would be unable to attend this meeting. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None ALTERNATIVES:As per Commission FISCAL EFFECTS:None Report compiled on: December 5, 2022 4 Memorandum REPORT TO:City Commission FROM:Nadine Waters, Accounts Payable Clerk Nicole Armstrong, Accounts Payable Clerk Levi Stewart, Assistant City Controller Aaron Funk, City Controller Melissa Hodnett, Finance Director SUBJECT:Accounts Payable Claims Review and Approval MEETING DATE:February 14, 2023 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Finance RECOMMENDATION:The City Commission is recommended to make a motion and approve payment of claims as presented. STRATEGIC PLAN:7.5. Funding and Delivery of City Services: Use equitable and sustainable sources of funding for appropriate City services, and deliver them in a lean and efficient manner. BACKGROUND:Montana Code Annotated, Section 7-6-4301 requires the City Commission to review claims prior to payment. Claims presented to the City Commission under this item have been reviewed and validated by the Finance Department. The Department has ensured that all goods and services have been received along with necessary authorizations and supporting documentation. Additionally, the Department confirmed all expenditures were appropriately coded and within the current fiscal year allocated budget. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None ALTERNATIVES:The City Commission could decide not to approve these claims or a portion of the claims presented. This alternative is not recommended as it may result in unbudgeted late fees assessed against the City. FISCAL EFFECTS:The total amount of the claims to be paid is presented at the bottom of the Expenditure Approval List posted on the City’s website at https://www.bozeman.net/departments/finance/purchasing. Report compiled on: February 9, 2023 5 Memorandum REPORT TO:City Commission FROM:Bob Murray, Project Engineer Lance Lehigh, Interim City Engineer SUBJECT:Authorize the City Manager to Sign a Notice of Award for the Cottonwood Road (Oak to Baxter) project, to Treasure State, Inc. for Schedule I in the Amount of $7,955,703.50, and Final Contract Documents Once Received MEETING DATE:February 14, 2023 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Agreement - Vendor/Contract RECOMMENDATION:Authorize the City Manager to sign the Notice of Award for the Cottonwood Road (Oak to Baxter) project, to Treasure State, Inc. for Schedule I in the amount of $7,955,703.50, and final contract documents once received. STRATEGIC PLAN:4.3 Strategic Infrastructure Choices: Prioritize long-term investment and maintenance for existing and new infrastructure. BACKGROUND:Attached is a copy of the Notice of Award for the above referenced project. The project consists of the construction of a new five-lane principal arterial roadway from Oak Street to Baxter Lane with curb and gutter, separated multi-use pathway on the east side, sidewalk on the west side, a multi-lane roundabout with a HAWK pedestrian signal at the Cottonwood/Baxter Intersection, lighting, water main, stormwater and utility improvements. Bids for the above-referenced project were opened on December 21, 2022, with 1 bid being received. The bid was submitted by Treasure State, Inc. in the amount of $7,755,703.50. The engineer’s estimate was $7,209,523.00. Although above the engineer’s estimate, we feel that it is a reasonable price and should be awarded and it is well below the total amount budgeted in the Capital Improvement Plan. As discussed in the attached award recommendation letter from Morrison Maierle, they last updated their estimate in February of last year. Construction cost indexes that they researched for the period from February until the bid opening in December show a range of cost increase from 5% to 12%. The bid that we received is within that range. We feel the engineers estimate was low rather than the bid being high. There was a second schedule included in the bid package to lower the existing sewer main in Baxter Lane. The bid for that schedule came in significantly higher than expected and is not being recommended for award. The Notice of Award, Bid Tabulation, and the Engineers award recommendation are attached. 6 UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None ALTERNATIVES:As suggested by the Commission FISCAL EFFECTS:This project will be paid for from a combination of the Arterial and Collector District Fund, Street Impact Fee Fund, Water Fund and Water Impact Fee Fund (Project Numbers SIF138, SIF086, WIF52). The total funding in the approved Capital Improvement Plan exceeds the bid amount. Attachments: Cottonwood Notice of Award.doc Cottonwood Award Recommendation and Bid Tab 01 06 2023.pdf Report compiled on: January 31, 2023 7 Notice of Award – Page 1 of 1 EJCDC C-510 Prepared by the Engineers Joint Contract Documents Committee@BCL@940B7319.doc Revised January 2010 Notice of Award Dated You are notified that your Bid dated December 21, 2022 for the above Contract has been considered. You are the Successful Bidder and are awarded a Contract for Schedule I Only. The Contract Price of your Contract is Seven Million Nine Hundred Fifty Five Thousand Seven Hundred Three and Fifty One Hundreth Dollars ($7,955,703.50). 6 copies of each of the proposed Contract Documents (except Drawings) accompany this Notice of Award. 2 sets of the Drawings will be delivered separately or otherwise made available to you immediately. You must comply with the following conditions precedent within fifteen days of the date you receive this Notice of Award. 1.Deliver to the Owner [4] fully executed counterparts of the Contract Documents. 2.Deliver with the executed Contract Documents the Contract security [Bonds] as specified in the Instructions to Bidders (Article 20), [and] General Conditions (Paragraphs 2.01 and 5.01) [and Supplementary Conditions (Paragraph SC-2.01).] 3.Other conditions precedent: Submit insurance certificates documenting coverage listed in the General Conditions and Supplementary Conditions Failure to comply with these conditions within the time specified will entitle Owner to consider you in default, annul this Notice of Award and declare your Bid security forfeited. Within fifteen days after you comply with the above conditions, Owner will return to you two fully executed counterparts of the Contract Documents. Owner By: Authorized Signature Title Copy to Engineer Project: Cottonwood Road (Oak to Baxter) Owner: City of Bozeman Owner's Contract No.: Contract:Schedule I Engineer's Project No.:0417.085 Bidder:Treasure State, Inc. Bidder's Address: (send Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested): 560 Clovehitch Road Belgrade, MT 59714 8 9 10 Cottonwood Road (Oak to Baxter) (#8339716) Owner: Bozeman MT, City of Solicitor: Morrison-Maierle, Inc. - Bozeman 12/21/2022 03:00 PM MST Engineer Estimate Treasure State, Inc. Section TitlLine Item Item Code Item Descr UofM Quantity Unit Price Extension Unit Price Extension Cottonwood Road - Schedule I $7,209,523.00 $7,955,703.50 1 101 Mobilizatio LS 1 $493,030.00 $493,030.00 $400,050.00 $400,050.00 2 102 Taxes, Bond LS 1 $164,343.00 $164,343.00 $200,000.00 $200,000.00 4 104 Constructio LS 1 $60,000.00 $60,000.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 5 105 Furnish, Ere LS 1 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $25,500.00 $25,500.00 6 106 Existing Str EA 20 $245.00 $4,900.00 $300.00 $6,000.00 7 107 Existing De EA 8 $150.00 $1,200.00 $150.00 $1,200.00 8 108 Existing Pav LS 1 $7,500.00 $7,500.00 $8,500.00 $8,500.00 9 109 Remove an EA 1 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 10 110 Remove Ex SY 6068 $12.00 $72,816.00 $21.50 $130,462.00 11 111 Asphalt Co SF 93 $25.00 $2,325.00 $75.00 $6,975.00 12 112 Remove Ex SY 190 $7.00 $1,330.00 $21.50 $4,085.00 13 113 Remove Ex LF 862 $7.00 $6,034.00 $10.00 $8,620.00 14 114 Remove Ex LS 1 $8,300.00 $8,300.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 15 115 Remove Fir EA 1 $5,500.00 $5,500.00 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 16 116 Remove an LF 390 $28.00 $10,920.00 $25.00 $9,750.00 17 117 Remove Ex LF 2012 $17.00 $34,204.00 $1.50 $3,018.00 18 118 Remove Ex EA 2 $550.00 $1,100.00 $1,000.00 $2,000.00 19 119 Abandon Ex EA 1 $2,750.00 $2,750.00 $6,000.00 $6,000.00 20 120 Reset Exist EA 1 $5,500.00 $5,500.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 21 121 Excavation CY 16725 $20.00 $334,500.00 $13.75 $229,968.75 22 122 EmbankmeCY 21919 $28.00 $613,732.00 $25.00 $547,975.00 23 123 Non-Wove SY 35267 $2.00 $70,534.00 $2.00 $70,534.00 24 124 6-Inch Min CY 15706 $24.00 $376,944.00 $41.00 $643,946.00 25 125 1-1/2"-Inch CY 8775 $33.00 $289,575.00 $53.00 $465,075.00 26 126 Asphalt Co TON 6636 $94.00 $623,784.00 $100.00 $663,600.00 27 127 SS-1 or CSS GAL 2808 $5.00 $14,040.00 $10.00 $28,080.00 28 128 Combined LF 13264 $23.00 $305,072.00 $15.50 $205,592.00 29 129 Mountable LF 469 $23.00 $10,787.00 $23.25 $10,904.25 30 130 Concrete D SF 1557 $11.00 $17,127.00 $9.50 $14,791.50 31 131 Concrete T SF 5322 $23.00 $122,406.00 $23.25 $123,736.50 32 132 Concrete M SF 13375 $13.00 $173,875.00 $7.50 $100,312.50 33 133 Concrete S SF 35685 $11.00 $392,535.00 $8.50 $303,322.50 34 134 Concrete V SF 655 $17.00 $11,135.00 $13.50 $8,842.50 35 135 Concrete C EA 6 $1,820.00 $10,920.00 $1,400.00 $8,400.00 36 136 Truncated SF 656 $50.00 $32,800.00 $50.00 $32,800.00 37 137 White Epox GAL 43 $415.00 $17,845.00 $200.00 $8,600.00 38 138 Yellow Epo GAL 44 $415.00 $18,260.00 $200.00 $8,800.00 39 139 Yellow Epo GAL 101 $660.00 $66,660.00 $485.00 $48,985.00 40 140 Reflective T SF 2032 $61.00 $123,952.00 $77.50 $157,480.00 41 141 Reflective T LF 2965 $33.00 $97,845.00 $20.25 $60,041.25 42 142 Reflective T LF 124 $39.00 $4,836.00 $45.00 $5,580.00 43 143 Reflective T LF 1466 $50.00 $73,300.00 $64.75 $94,923.50 44 144 Reflective T LF 562 $50.00 $28,100.00 $66.75 $37,513.50 45 145 Street Sign EA 93 $580.00 $53,940.00 $850.00 $79,050.00 46 146 Flexible De EA 50 $100.00 $5,000.00 $175.00 $8,750.00 47 147 Topsoil PlacCY 1661 $38.00 $63,118.00 $52.00 $86,372.00 48 148 Hydraulic SSY 18295 $6.00 $109,770.00 $1.25 $22,868.75 49 149 Conduit- Sc LF 6262 $10.00 $62,620.00 $25.25 $158,115.50 50 150 Conduit- Sc LF 452 $15.50 $7,006.00 $41.00 $18,532.00 51 151 Conduit- Sc LF 55 $22.00 $1,210.00 $70.00 $3,850.00 52 152 Pull Box- Co EA 24 $1,100.00 $26,400.00 $1,600.00 $38,400.00 53 153 Pull Box- Co EA 10 $1,100.00 $11,000.00 $1,900.00 $19,000.00 54 154 Pull Box- Co EA 2 $1,100.00 $2,200.00 $3,650.00 $7,300.00 55 155 Cable- Cop CLF 24 $150.00 $3,600.00 $425.00 $10,200.00 56 156 Cable- Cop CLF 29 $250.00 $7,250.00 $485.00 $14,065.00 11 57 157 Conductor- CLF 125 $150.00 $18,750.00 $285.00 $35,625.00 58 158 Conductor- CLF 32 $110.00 $3,520.00 $200.00 $6,400.00 59 159 Conductor- CLF 101 $100.00 $10,100.00 $145.00 $14,645.00 60 160 High Efficac EA 8 $1,200.00 $9,600.00 $1,300.00 $10,400.00 61 161 E1 Luminai EA 23 $10,000.00 $230,000.00 $12,250.00 $281,750.00 62 162 Serv Assem EA 1 $3,500.00 $3,500.00 $8,575.00 $8,575.00 63 163 Serv Assem EA 1 $3,500.00 $3,500.00 $4,550.00 $4,550.00 64 164 Photo Elect EA 2 $450.00 $900.00 $250.00 $500.00 65 165 Sig- Pedest EA 16 $1,150.00 $18,400.00 $2,025.00 $32,400.00 66 166 Pedestrian EA 24 $4,000.00 $96,000.00 $2,950.00 $70,800.00 67 167 Contlr/Traf EA 2 $4,000.00 $8,000.00 $60,500.00 $121,000.00 68 168 Sig Standar EA 8 $875.00 $7,000.00 $2,150.00 $17,200.00 69 169 Sig Standar EA 1 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $26,750.00 $26,750.00 70 170 Sig Standar EA 2 $20,000.00 $40,000.00 $28,500.00 $57,000.00 71 171 Sig Standar EA 5 $20,000.00 $100,000.00 $33,300.00 $166,500.00 72 172 Push Butto EA 16 $1,250.00 $20,000.00 $2,250.00 $36,000.00 74 174 12" ASTM F LF 193 $50.00 $9,650.00 $60.00 $11,580.00 75 175 15" ASTM F LF 1837 $55.00 $101,035.00 $66.00 $121,242.00 76 176 18" ASTM F LF 1204 $46.00 $55,384.00 $81.00 $97,524.00 77 177 15" Irr. Clas LF 341 $42.00 $14,322.00 $104.00 $35,464.00 78 178 24? Storm EA 1 $2,750.00 $2,750.00 $4,100.00 $4,100.00 79 179 Standard St EA 5 $4,400.00 $22,000.00 $5,200.00 $26,000.00 80 180 Standard D EA 2 $8,820.00 $17,640.00 $8,650.00 $17,300.00 81 181 48" Combin EA 2 $5,500.00 $11,000.00 $6,350.00 $12,700.00 82 182 48" Storm D EA 10 $4,400.00 $44,000.00 $6,350.00 $63,500.00 83 183 48" Storm D VF 21.7 $220.00 $4,774.00 $325.00 $7,052.50 84 184 48" Combin VF 0.8 $220.00 $176.00 $450.00 $360.00 85 185 Connect to EA 1 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 86 186 Storm Drai CY 2828 $20.00 $56,560.00 $13.00 $36,764.00 87 187 Adjust Exist EA 2 $1,650.00 $3,300.00 $500.00 $1,000.00 88 188 Class 1 RiprCY 35 $155.00 $5,425.00 $90.00 $3,150.00 89 189 Sewer Man EA 6 $2,200.00 $13,200.00 $650.00 $3,900.00 90 190 4" SDR 26 P LF 202 $44.00 $8,888.00 $100.00 $20,200.00 91 191 Sanitary Se EA 2 $3,300.00 $6,600.00 $650.00 $1,300.00 92 192 Irrigation S LF 627 $66.00 $41,382.00 $40.00 $25,080.00 93 193 Adjust Exist EA 3 $800.00 $2,400.00 $500.00 $1,500.00 94 194 8" Water MLF 214 $83.00 $17,762.00 $97.00 $20,758.00 95 195 12" Water LF 63 $100.00 $6,300.00 $155.00 $9,765.00 96 196 16" Water LF 2488 $111.00 $276,168.00 $170.00 $422,960.00 97 197 36" Water LF 756 $440.00 $332,640.00 $612.00 $462,672.00 98 198 Water ServEA 1 $2,760.00 $2,760.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 99 199 8" Fitting EA 3 $1,660.00 $4,980.00 $450.00 $1,350.00 100 200 12" Fitting EA 2 $2,200.00 $4,400.00 $1,100.00 $2,200.00 101 201 16" Fitting EA 10 $2,200.00 $22,000.00 $2,000.00 $20,000.00 102 202 36" Fitting EA 6 $10,000.00 $60,000.00 $7,500.00 $45,000.00 103 203 36? Cross EA 1 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 $20,750.00 $20,750.00 104 204 8" Gate Val EA 3 $5,525.00 $16,575.00 $3,300.00 $9,900.00 105 205 16" Gate Va EA 7 $18,000.00 $126,000.00 $13,000.00 $91,000.00 106 206 36" Butterf EA 2 $20,000.00 $40,000.00 $27,000.00 $54,000.00 107 207 Connect to EA 4 $5,500.00 $22,000.00 $2,500.00 $10,000.00 108 208 Insulation BSF 1128 $9.00 $10,152.00 $15.00 $16,920.00 109 209 Fire Hydran EA 8 $6,150.00 $49,200.00 $10,000.00 $80,000.00 110 210 Blow-Off H EA 2 $3,000.00 $6,000.00 $4,500.00 $9,000.00 111 211 Utility Cros EA 17 $2,200.00 $37,400.00 $950.00 $16,150.00 112 212 12? ASTM F LF 300 $50.00 $15,000.00 $80.00 $24,000.00 Allowance Section $100,000.00 $100,000.00 113 103 Miscellaneo UNIT 100000 $1.00 $100,000.00 $1.00 $100,000.00 SCHEDULE II: BAXTER LANE SEWER IMPROVEMENTS $651,541.50 $1,513,666.40 114 301 Mobilizatio LS 1 $40,668.00 $40,668.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 115 302 Remove Ex LF 28 $100.00 $2,800.00 $200.00 $5,600.00 116 303 Fill and Aba CY 178 $200.00 $35,600.00 $311.50 $55,447.00 117 304 Abandon Ex EA 3 $2,000.00 $6,000.00 $4,000.00 $12,000.00 118 305 Remove Ex SY 1112 $11.00 $12,232.00 $21.50 $23,908.00 12 119 306 Non-Wove SY 1112 $1.60 $1,779.20 $2.00 $2,224.00 120 307 6-Inch Min CY 495 $21.50 $10,642.50 $41.00 $20,295.00 121 308 1-1/2"-Inch CY 275 $30.00 $8,250.00 $53.00 $14,575.00 122 309 Asphalt Co TON 250 $85.00 $21,250.00 $115.00 $28,750.00 123 310 SS-1 or CSS GAL 111.2 $4.00 $444.80 $27.00 $3,002.40 124 311 Imported BCY 1500 $20.00 $30,000.00 $40.00 $60,000.00 125 312 21" ASTM F LF 398 $200.00 $79,600.00 $645.00 $256,710.00 126 313 27" ASTM F LF 1213 $250.00 $303,250.00 $685.00 $830,905.00 127 314 60" Sanitar EA 1 $6,200.00 $6,200.00 $5,500.00 $5,500.00 128 315 72" Sanitar EA 4 $7,500.00 $30,000.00 $8,500.00 $34,000.00 129 316 84" Sanitar EA 1 $9,000.00 $9,000.00 $14,000.00 $14,000.00 130 317 60" Sanitar VF 17.1 $275.00 $4,702.50 $500.00 $8,550.00 131 318 72" Sanitar VF 53.2 $350.00 $18,620.00 $550.00 $29,260.00 132 319 84" Sanitar VF 15.3 $425.00 $6,502.50 $800.00 $12,240.00 133 320 Sewer Main EA 2 $6,000.00 $12,000.00 $8,000.00 $16,000.00 134 321 Utility Cros EA 6 $2,000.00 $12,000.00 $950.00 $5,700.00 Base Bid Total:$7,961,064.50 $9,569,369.90 13 Memorandum REPORT TO:City Commission FROM:Mikaela Schultz, Engineer I Nicholas Ross, Director of Transportation and Engineering SUBJECT:Authorize the City Manager to Sign a Conditional Irrevocable Offer of Dedication with WSF LLC for the West Side Flats Phase 2 and 3 Site Plan (22026) MEETING DATE:February 14, 2023 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Agreement - Property RECOMMENDATION:Authorize the City Manager to sign a Conditional Irrevocable Offer of Dedication with WSF LLC for the West Side Flats Phase 2 & 3 Site Plan (22026). STRATEGIC PLAN:4.3 Strategic Infrastructure Choices: Prioritize long-term investment and maintenance for existing and new infrastructure. BACKGROUND:Attached is a copy (original to City Clerk) of the partially executed agreement. Engineering staff reviewed the document and found it to be acceptable. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None ALTERNATIVES: As suggested by the City Commission. FISCAL EFFECTS:None Attachments: Conditional Irrevocable Offer of Dedication Report compiled on: January 31, 2023 14 15 16 17 18 Memorandum REPORT TO:City Commission FROM:Susan Ryan, Engineer II Nicholas Ross, Director of Transportation and Engineering SUBJECT:Authorize the City Manager to Sign a Utility Easement with ABS, LLC for the Addison Place Condos (22108) MEETING DATE:February 14, 2023 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Agreement - Property RECOMMENDATION:Authorize the City Manager to sign a Utility Easement with ABS, LLC for the Addison Place Condos (22108). STRATEGIC PLAN:4.3 Strategic Infrastructure Choices: Prioritize long-term investment and maintenance for existing and new infrastructure. BACKGROUND:Attached is a copy (original to City Clerk) of the partially executed agreement. Engineering staff reviewed the document and found it to be acceptable. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None ALTERNATIVES:As suggested by the City Commission. FISCAL EFFECTS:None Attachments: Utility Easement Report compiled on: January 31, 2023 19 20 21 22 23 Memorandum REPORT TO:City Commission FROM:Mikaela Schultz, Engineer I Nicholas Ross, Director of Transportation and Engineering SUBJECT:Authorize the City Manager to Sign a Trail Corridor Easement with Mitchell Development & Investments, LLC for the Bozeman Gateway PUD Phase 5 (22145) MEETING DATE:February 14, 2023 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Agreement - Property RECOMMENDATION:Authorize the City Manager to sign a Trail Corridor Easement with Mitchell Development & Investments, LLC for the Bozeman Gateway PUD Phase 5 (22145). STRATEGIC PLAN:4.3 Strategic Infrastructure Choices: Prioritize long-term investment and maintenance for existing and new infrastructure. BACKGROUND:Attached is a copy (original to City Clerk) of the partially executed agreement. Engineering staff reviewed the document and found it to be acceptable. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None ALTERNATIVES:As suggested by the City Commission. FISCAL EFFECTS:None Attachments: Trail Corridor Easement Report compiled on: January 31, 2023 24 25 26 27 28 Memorandum REPORT TO:City Commission FROM:Adam Oliver, Stormwater Program Manager John Alston, Utilities Director SUBJECT:Authorize the City Manager to Sign a Montana Department of Environmental Quality 2022 Stormwater Annual Report Form MEETING DATE:February 14, 2023 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Plan/Report/Study RECOMMENDATION:Authorize the City Manager to sign the 2022 Stormwater Annual Report Form, which will then be submitted electronically with attachments to Montana Department of Environmental Quality. STRATEGIC PLAN:6.1 Clean Water Supplies: Ensure adequate supplies of clean water for today and tomorrow. BACKGROUND:On June 25th, 2012, Commissioners adopted Ordinance 1831, creating a stormwater utility. An annual report is produced by staff each year that details the programs Stormwater Division is responsible for, tracks their development, tracks water quality monitoring, and inventories stormwater infrastructure. This report is required by the MS4 Permit, which is issued by The Montana Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). The most recent iteration of the permit became effective April 1, 2022. The annual report requires the City Manager's signature, and is attached. Because of our proximity and connected systems, Montana State University (MSU) and the City of Bozeman are co-permitees on the MS4 Permit. The MS4 Permit requires documentation to be submitted by each entity, although much of the supporting information is the same. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None ALTERNATIVES:As suggested by the Commission FISCAL EFFECTS:The Stormwater Division is funded by an enterprise fund including MSU as a utility ratepayer within the City. Annual fees required by the MS4 permit are are outlined in ARM 17.30.201 and are due at the same time as the Stormwater Annual Report. Staff time to conduct the Division's programs and prepare the report is required each year, but no additional costs are associated with the signature or submittal of this form. 29 Attachments: 2022_AnnualReport_Stormwater.pdf 2022 SWMP.pdf Report compiled on: January 18, 2023 30 Updated November 2022 MS4-AR Page | 1 of 3 Agency Use Permit No.: MTR04 Date Rec’d Amount Rec’d Check No. Rec’d By FORM MS4-AR Annual Report Form Storm Water Discharges Associated with MS4s MTR040000 This annual report form is to be completed by each permittee authorized under the General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Small Municipal Separate Storm Water Sewer Systems (MS4s). The completed form must be electronically submitted to DEQ by March 1st of each year starting March 1st, 2023. Reporting Year: 2023 2024 2025 2026 (reporting period is for the preceding calendar year, Jan 1st- Dec 31st) MS4 Information Permit Number M T R 0 4 __ __ __ __ Small MS4 Name _________________________________________________________________ Contact Person, (name, title) _________________________________________________________________ Mailing Address _________________________________________________________________ City, State, and Zip Code _________________________________________________________________ Phone Number, Email Address _________________________________________________________________ Authorized as a Co-permittee? Yes: _________________________________ No (If, yes provide Co-permittee MS4 name in the blank provided. Each co-permittee must submit a separate complete annual report form.) Is the MS4 sharing responsibility? If yes, attach written acceptance and explanation of shared obligation(s). Yes No Attach an organizational chart identifying the primary SWMP coordinator, positions responsible for implementing requirements of the permit, and contact information for each individual. Attached Not Attached Minimum Control Measure 1 & 2 Link to storm water website List of four key target audiences: Associated Pollutants: Outreach strategy: ______________________________ ______________________________ ______________________________ ______________________________ ______________________________ ______________________________ ______________________________ ______________________________ ______________________________ ______________________________ ______________________________ ______________________________ Attach documentation of participation and/or feedback of key target audiences. Attached Not Attached Water Protection Bureau Montana Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Contact Info Stormwater Website 31 Updated November 2022 MS4-AR Page | 2 of 3 Minimum Control Measure 3 (attach the following in the order listed) List of potential non-storm water discharges identified as significant contributors of pollutants (i.e. illicit discharges), associated pollutants, and any local controls or conditions placed on these discharges. Attached Not Attached Have there been updates to the MS4’s storm sewer maps? Yes No, the map(s) were last updated: ________ If yes, submit the maps using one of the following options: Electronic GIS shapefiles emailed to DEQMPDESDataManagement@mt.gov Attached Hard copy Link to online maps: _______________________________________________ Summary of investigations and corrective actions taken over the past year per the Illicit Discharge and Corrective Action Plan. Attached Not Attached Number of outfalls inspected during dry weather: _______ of _______ (total number of outfalls) Number of high priority outfalls inspected: _______ of _______ (total number of high priority outfalls) Attach a summary of any resulting actions taken from screening results. Attached Not Applicable Year 2023 only, unless updates were made: A copy or link to the adopted ordinance, policy, procedure, and/ or regulatory mechanism prohibiting illicit discharges. Attached or Link BMC 40.04.200 Minimum Control Measure 4 (attach the following in the order listed) List of construction sites/projects inspected over the last year and any resulting actions. Attached Not Attached Year 2023 only, unless updates were made: A copy of the construction storm water management plan review checklist. Attached Not Attached A copy of the construction site inspection form or checklist. Attached Not Attached A copy or link to the adopted ordinance, policy, procedure, and/or regulatory mechanism requiring construction storm water controls. Attached or Link:_BMC 40.04.350________________________________ Minimum Control Measure 5 (attach the following in the order listed) Inventory of regulated projects using offsite treatment for post-construction runoff. Attached Not Applicable Number of high priority post-construction storm water management controls inspected: _______ Attach a summary of any resulting actions taken from inspections. Attached Not Applicable Year 2023 only, unless updates were made: A copy of the post-construction storm water management plan review checklist. Attached Not Attached A copy of the post-construction site inspection form or checklist. Attached Not Attached A copy or link to the adopted ordinance, policy, procedure, and/or regulatory mechanism requiring post-construction storm water controls. Attached or Link ___________________________________________ Year 2025 only: Submit a plan to modify relevant codes, ordinances, policies, and/or programs to implement LID/green infrastructure concepts. Attached Not Attached Minimum Control Measure 6 (attach the following in the order listed) Number of SOPs evaluated: ____15___ of ___15____ (total number of SOPs for permittee facilities/activities) Summary of SOP updates made in the last year. Attached Not Applicable Records of completed trainings in conformance with section II.B. of the General Permit. Attached Not Attached (City only) 32 Updated November 2022 MS4-AR Page | 3 of 3 Year 2023 only, unless updates were made: Inventory of permittee facilities/activities with potential to contribute contaminants. Attached Not Attached Summary of inspection procedures for facilities and their structural storm water controls. Attached Not Attached Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) In the last year, were any public comments received on the SWMP? Yes No If yes, attach a summary of comments received. Attached Not Applicable In the last year, have additional SWMP updates been made other than those listed above? Yes No If yes, attach a summary including the date and description of updates and rationale for decision making. Attached Not Applicable Monitoring and Reporting (attach the following in the order listed) I verify all outfall monitoring has been performed and recorded in conformance with section II.C. and II.D. of the General Permit. (If not able to dependably obtain two samples a year at each monitoring location, attach a summary of rationale. Contact DEQ regarding requests for a change in monitoring locations.) Attach a summary of implemented BMPs used to target and reduce discharges to impaired waterbodies and a schedule for the following year’s BMP implementation. Attached Not Applicable Year 2023 only, unless updates were made: Attach an inventory of outfalls discharging to impaired waterbodies including associated pollutants. Attached Not Applicable MS4s with an approved TMDL: Year 2023 only: Submit a TMDL-related sampling plan for DEQ review. Attached Not Applicable Years 2024, 2025, and 2026: In the last year, were any public comments received on the sampling plan? Yes No If yes, attach a summary of comments received and any resulting actions/modifications. Attached Not Applicable Certification* All Permittees Must Complete the Following Certification: I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of fine and imprisonment for knowing violations. [75-5-633, MCA]. Name (Type or Print) Title (Type or Print) Phone Number Signature Date Signed * This Annual Report Form must be completed, signed, and certified as follows: • For a corporation, by a principal officer of at least the level of vice president; • For a partnership or sole proprietorship, by a general partner or the proprietor, respectively; or • For a municipality, state, federal, or other public facility, by either a principal executive officer or ranking elected official. See SWMP 2.3 & 2.4 33 City of Bozeman & Montana State University Stormwater Management Plan MS4 General Permit Term 2022 – 2027 Updated January 21, 2023 Photo Credit: bozemanrealestate.group/blog/coolest-pictures-of-downtown-bozeman 34 Blank Page 35 Table of Contents Program Administration Section 1.0 Capital Project Program Public Education Program Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Program Construction Site Management Program Post-Construction Program Good Housekeeping Program Sampling and Evaluation Program Stormwater Management Plan Updates Section 2.0 Section 3.0 Section 4.0 Section 5.0 Section 6.0 Section 7.0 Section 8.0 Section 9.0 36 Blank Page 37 Section 1.0 Program Administration Graphic 1.0.2: Failed stormwater pipe Graphic 1.0.1: Street flooding resulting from clogged infrastructure 38 SECTION 1.0 - PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION 2 Blank Page 39 SECTION 1.0 - PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION 3 1.1 Introduction This Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP) describes the City of Bozeman (City) and Montana State University (University), collectively known as the MS4, the structural and administrative Best Management Practices (BMPs) engineered, implemented, maintained, and enforced to meet the following objectives:  Protect public safety;  Improve water quality; and  Comply with environmental regulations. This SWMP is an iterative and evolving document with updates occurring annually. The MS4 tracks updates in SWMP Section 9.0. SWMP Section 1.0 details the following components necessary to administer the MS4’s Program, including:  Background Information (1.2)  City Program Framework (1.3)  University Program Framework (1.4)  Stormwater Management Team (1.5)  Sharing Responsibility (1.6)  Collaborative Organizations (1.7)  Additional Regulatory Responsibilities (1.8)  Annual Report (1.9)  Public Comments (1.10) 1.2 Background Information The MS4 is an incorporated town located in Gallatin County, Montana, and has a population of 53,293 as of the 2020 Census (University population 16,841). The MS4’s primary land-use type is residential and commercial, with isolated industrial areas. Other notable geographical details include:  Elevation: 4820 ft.  Climate: Cold continental, with warm and dry summers, cold and dry winters  Average Temperature: 44.6 ˚F  Average Precipitation: 18.4 inches (University rain gauge) The MS4 is located at the headwaters of the Upper Missouri Watershed and possesses relatively pristine surface water quality that supports several beneficial uses, including aquatic life, drinking water, agriculture, and recreation. Numerous waterways originate within and pass through the MS4. The MS4’s most notable waterway is Bozeman Creek (aka Sourdough Creek), which originates in the Gallatin Mountains south of its jurisdictional boundary. Flowing north, Bozeman Creek enters the MS4 at its southeastern border and continues until its confluence with the E. Gallatin River. The Montana Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) determined that Bozeman Creek has various impairments from natural and anthropogenic sources when developing its 2013 Lower Gallatin Planning Area Total Maximum Daily Load Report (TMDL). The second most notable waterway is Mandeville Creek, a small, spring fed watercourse that originates in the south end of Bozeman. Mandeville Creek also flows north until its confluence with the E. Gallatin River. The MDEQ determined that Mandeville Creek also has various impairments from natural and anthropogenic sources when developing its TMDL. 40 SECTION 1.0 - PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION 4 Numerous perennial and intermittent spring creeks flow through the MS4 in a web of channels, irrigation ditches, and pipes. The MDEQ has not completed an assessment of these waterways. The MS4’s water resources represent a significant community value and are the backbone of its tourism, recreation, and neighboring agricultural industries. A growing threat to these invaluable resources is stormwater runoff, which occurs when rainfall and snowmelt flow across developed surfaces, such as yards, roadways, parking lots, and rooftops. Stormwater picks up pollutants before entering storm sewers, such as drains, pipes, and ditches, and eventually discharges into the MS4’s waterways. Stormwater runoff can result in property damage, public health threats, and environmental degradation if not proactively managed. Specific pollutants of concern include:  Sediment: Sourced from barren ground, construction sites, road sand, unpaved roads and trails, gravel parking lots, windblown dust, and vehicle grime, resulting in suffocated aquatic habitat and alterations to stream channel morphology.  Nitrogen and Phosphorous: Sourced from improper lawn fertilizer application, grass clippings, and yard debris, resulting in oxygen-depleting algae blooms.  E.coli: Sourced from substandard septic systems and pet waste, resulting in toxic conditions for the public and wildlife.  Floatables: Sourced from littering, overfilled garbage cans, and unsecured loads, resulting in clogged infrastructure, impaired aesthetic value, and endangered wildlife.  Oil, Grease, Metals, and Detergents: Sourced from motor vehicles, car spills, and car washing, resulting in toxic conditions for humans and wildlife.  Temperature: Sourced from extensive and continuous impervious areas and lack of shade, resulting in harmful impacts to coldwater fisheries. To counter stormwater runoff’s impacts, the United States Congress established the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) as a part of the Clean Water Act (CWA) in 1972 to preserve and restore the health of the United States’ Waters. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is the lead organization tasked with the implementation and oversight of the CWA. In Montana, the MDEQ has primacy, allowing for further state-scale interpretation, enactment, and enforcement. The NDPES program regulates water pollution through a series of permits focused on point sources, such as industrial facilities, wastewater plants, and stormwater discharges. The driving permit behind the development and implementation of this SWMP is the MDEQ’s Phase 2 General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4 Permit), which requires the City and University to implement a variety of programs to prevent and mitigate polluted discharges to waterways. The MDEQ designates the City as a traditional permittee and the University as a non-traditional permittee. Both parties are co-permittees because their storm sewers are connected, and they work together on various administrative programs. The MDEQ requires the MS4 to complete the following:  Prepare and submit individual Notices of Intent (NOI).  Receive authorizations to discharge from MDEQ after permit issuance in 2022.  Prepare and submit individual Annual Reports.  Develop, implement, and update this SWMP throughout the MS4 Permit term. Also, the MDEQ requires the MS4 to administer a program that works to accomplish the following:  Educate the public (SWMP Section 3.0)  Engage citizens through involvement and participation (SWMP Section 3.0) 41 SECTION 1.0 - PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION 5  Detect and eliminate illicit discharges and connections (SWMP Section 4.0)  Regulate construction sites (SWMP Section 5.0)  Regulate stormwater facilities constructed with new and re-development (SWMP Section 6.0)  Mitigate polluted discharges from municipal facilities and operations (SWMP Section 7.0)  Collect and analyze water quality and stormwater runoff data (SWMP Section 8.0) The following sections of this SWMP outline the MS4’s work within each of these programs. 1.3 City Program Framework On June 25, 2012, the City adopted Ordinance 1831, creating a Stormwater Utility, providing revenue collection for the operation and maintenance of the City’s stormwater system. Funding was initially allocated to inventory, map, and assess the condition of the City’s storm sewer. This effort was in response to findings identified during a 2011 MDEQ MS4 Permit audit, which included one violation, 16 program deficiencies, and 23 improvement recommendations. On March 3, 2014, the City presented the results of their inventory, mapping, and assessment effort to City Commissioners. The City inventoried over ten thousand individual assets, many of which were clogged, cracked, buried, or in disrepair. Also, a program administration review identified significant shortfalls. Commissioners directed the City to develop options for addressing known issues. On April 21, 2014, the City presented three levels of service, differing primarily on the timeline required to address issues and the annual funding level. Commissioners decided to implement a program that included a funding level of $1.2 million annually for operations, treatment, and deferred maintenance. On February 23, 2015, the City adopted a new level of service and a rate model to collect service fees based on individual property’s impact on the stormwater system. On December 1, 2015, the City implemented the final piece of the new rate model allowing a fully funded and functional Stormwater Utility for the first time in its history. The City’s utility rate model includes the following components:  Flat Charge: Charged evenly across the service area. Properties with a water meter receive a flat monthly charge per meter. The funding pays for deferred maintenance projects.  Variable Charge: Charged proportionally to the amount of impervious area on a property. Impervious area does not allow water to soak into the ground during rain events, creating more stormwater runoff. Larger areas result in more impact on public storm sewers and waterways.  Utility Credit: Properties that have installed quantity and quality-based stormwater controls receive a billing credit as these properties impact the stormwater system less than those without stormwater infrastructure. The City’s utility rate model includes the following funding allocations:  Approximately $600,000 annually for deferred maintenance, which includes costs associated with the replacement and cleaning of storm sewer assets.  Approximately $700,000 annually for operations and maintenance, which includes expenses related to personnel, reoccurring system maintenance, supplies, and equipment.  Approximately $200,000 annually for system enhancements, which includes costs associated with stormwater treatment projects to remove pollutants before discharging to waterways. The Stormwater, Building, Strategic Services, and Finance Divisions work collaboratively to update the rate model regularly as new development occurs. The workflow includes: 1. Developers submit site plans to the Building Division through electronic permit software. 42 SECTION 1.0 - PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION 6 2. Staff review and upload site plans to a shared group folder on the City’s internal drive. 3. Strategic Services Staff check the folder regularly, import site plans into GIS, digitize impervious area, and update each polygon’s Equivalent Residential Unity (ERU) attribute. 4. Finance sends water meter notices to Staff when a project is nearing completion. 5. Stormwater Staff review impervious area data based on the address information provided by Finance and calculate an ERU total, including percentage credit, if applicable. 6. Stormwater Staff provide Finance Staff with an ERU value and credit value. 7. Finance Staff update software and generate a bill for customers. Table 1.3.1 shows impervious area additions per year (single-family units and public roads excluded): Table 1.3.1: Impervious Area Additions Calendar Year Impervious Acres Added New Site Plans 2017-2020 Average 71 95 2021 70 70 2022 67 62  Fiscal Year 2022 Budget (July 1, 2021 - June 30, 2022)  Resource Justification: Public budget approval process completed in June 2021. Staff gave a public presentation regarding past, current, and future work, and answered questions.  Program Effectiveness: See performance measures in SWMP Sections 2.0 - 8.0.  Resource Variation: +9% rate increase, steep increases in inflation this year  Staff: 8 FTEs, 1 additional Technician added, but several positions were vacant throughout the Fiscal Year  Fiscal Year 2023 Budget (July 1, 2022 - June 30, 2023)  Resource Justification: Public budget approval process completed in June 2021. Staff gave a public presentation regarding past, current, and future work, and answered questions.  Program Effectiveness: See performance measures in SWMP Sections 2.0 - 8.0.  Resource Variation: +9% rate increase  Staff: 8 FTEs, fully staffed at the end of the calendar year 2022 Table 1.3.2: FY21 Budget Totals Fiscal Year Budget Salaries and Benefits $640,866 Operating $317,907 Capital $700,000 Debt Service $194,735 Total Budget: $1,853,508 Table 1.3.3: FY22 Budget Totals Fiscal Year Budget Salaries and Benefits $676,084 Operating $329,467 Capital $675,000 Debt Service $194,735 Total Budget: $1,875,286 43 SECTION 1.0 - PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION 7 1.4 University Program Framework In the current year, the University has managed four projects of an acre or larger, which have influenced stormwater quantity and quality. Those projects are:  Wellness Center: Over One Acre, Active, Fall 2023 Planned Completion  Bobcat Athletic Complex: Over One Acre, Active, SWPPP Terminated, Winter 2022 Final Completion  American Indian Hall: Over One Acre, Active, 2021 Planned Completion  Romney Oval Renovation Project: Over One Acre, Active, Completed 2021  Romney Hall Renovation project: Under One Acre, Active, Completed 2021 Recently completed projects include:  Norm Asbjornson Hall Construction: Over One Acre, Complete 2020  Hyalite Hall: Over One Acre, Complete 2020  Montana Hall Elevator and Renovation: Under One Acre, Complete 2020 2022 update In 2022, the University has devoted approximately 740 hours to stormwater maintenance, management, and improvements and tracks work activities and labor using a work order system. In cooperation with the Engineering and Utilities Director, the Facilities Services Director coordinates and ensures MS4 Permit compliance. 1. Current Staff:  Engineering and Utility Manager: Directional and political support (40 hours per year)  Director - Facilities Services: Overall program coordination. Administers and supports environmental compliance programs; manages support personnel; identifies and advocates for infrastructure projects; conducts training, inspections, permit reviews, data collection, and reporting; manages reoccurring infrastructure maintenance, structural inspections, repairs, and replacements (350 hours/year)  Support Staff and Contracted Services: Groundskeepers, laborers, plumbers, and street sweeping (350 hours/year) The following representatives make up the University’s stormwater management team. Regular communication occurs, allowing for the exchange of necessary information:  Leader (Primary): Edward Hook – Director, Facilities Services MCM 1-6  Leader: Megan Sterl – Director, Engineering & Utilities MCM 1-6  Leader: Chris Catlett – Director, Satety & Risk Management MCM 1-3, 6  Leader: Kathryn Pearson, Director, Campus Planning, Design & Construction MCM 1, 2, 4-6  Leader: Kane Urdahl – Manager, Trades MCM 3-6 Table 1.3.3: FY23 Budget Totals Fiscal Year Budget Salaries and Benefits $802,382 Operating $515,822 Capital $672,250 Debt Service $194,173 Total Budget: $2,184,627 44 SECTION 1.0 - PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION 8  Leader: Jim Waterman – Manager, Landscape & Grounds MCM 3-6  Leader: Frank Stock – Manager, Operations MCM 5-6  Leader: Denis Hill – Custodial Services Supervisor MCM 3, 5-6 Current funding is not a line item but included in the general campus maintenance operations budget for Facilities Services. As allowable and necessary funds from Facilities Services General Operating and the Engineering and Utilities Infrastructure budget are allocated to specific stormwater improvement projects.  Fiscal Year 2022 Approved Budget (July 1, 2021 - June 30, 2022)  Resource Justification: Budget approval process completed June 29, 2019  Program Effectiveness: See SWMP Sections 2.0 - 8.0.  Resource Allocation Variation: None  Success Determination: See SWMP Sections 2.0 - 8.0.  Staff: 0.35 FTEs Table 1.4.5: FY22 Budget Totals Fiscal Year Budget Operating $126,500 Capital - Total Budget: $126,500  Fiscal Year 2023 Approved Budget (July 1, 2022 - June 30, 2023)  Resource Justification: Budget approval process completed June 29, 2019  Program Effectiveness: See SWMP Sections 2.0 - 8.0.  Resource Allocation Variation: None  Success Determination: See SWMP Sections 2.0 - 8.0.  Staff: 0.35 FTEs Table 1.4.5: FY23 Budget Totals Fiscal Year Budget Operating - Capital - Total Budget: $126,500 1.5 Stormwater Management Team The MS4’s Stormwater Management Team is described in Graphic 1.5.1 and the following section. A single point of contact links the organization charts. SWMP Team: Meets weekly and is comprised of the following positions: 1. Stormwater Program Manager: SWMP Coordinator as referred to in the MS4 Permit and the Enforcement Agent in Bozeman Municipal Code (BMC). Leads the SWMP Team, SWMP Subject Matter Experts, and coordination with SWMP Support Divisions. The Program Manager develops and manages the implementation of SWMP and MS4 Permit compliance activities, administers environmental compliance programs, manages personnel, prepares budgets, develops policies, coordinates infrastructure projects, and maintains the rate model. Primary permit responsibilities include: 45 SECTION 1.0 - PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION 9  Program Administration (SWMP Section 1.0)  Capital Project Program (SWMP Section 2.0)  Public Education Program (SWMP Section 3.0)  Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Program (SWMP Section 4.0)  Construction Site Management Program (SWMP Section 5.0)  Post Construction Program (SWMP Section 6.0)  Good Housekeeping Program (SWMP Section 7.0)  Sampling and Evaluation Program (SWMP Section 8.0) 2. Stormwater Program Specialist: Develops and implements water quality monitoring, BMP effectiveness research, and data analysis. Primary permit responsibilities include:  Public Education Program (SWMP Section 3.0)  Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Program (SWMP Section 4.0)  Good Housekeeping Program (SWMP Section 7.0)  Sampling and Evaluation Program (SWMP Section 8.0) 3. Stormwater Project Coordinator: Plans and manages stormwater conveyance, flood control, and treatment capital projects, implements the City’s asset maintenance efforts, and regulates drainage infrastructure. Primary permit responsibilities include:  Capital Project Program (SWMP Section 2.0)  Post Construction Program (SWMP Section 6.0)  Good Housekeeping Program (SWMP Section 7.0) 4. Two Stormwater Program Technicians: Perform permit reviews, site inspections, and reporting tasks. They assist in a wide variety of tasks. Primary permit responsibilities include:  Construction Site Management Program (SWMP Section 5.0) 46 47 SECTION 1.0 - PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION 11 48 The SWMP Team tracks phone call and email questions, requests, and complaints received from the public to gauge programmatic needs and workloads, including: Table 1.5.1: Correspondence Tracking Totals Correspondence Type Count 2021 2022 5-year Average Resident: Flooding Inquiry or Report 15 15 10.8 Resident: Construction Inquiry or Report 3 10 12.6 Resident: Water Quality Inquiry or Report 3 1 2 Resident: Pollution Inquiry or Report 5 3 6.2 Resident: Basin Inquiry or Report 6 3 9 Resident: Outreach Inquiry or Report 1 5 4.4 Resident: Rate Model Inquiry 1 0 3.2 Professional: Post-Const. Program 30 21 42 Professional: Pollution Program 5 5 7.8 Professional: Const. Program 359 291 304.4 Professional: Project Management 38 13 64 Professional: Education Program 13 5 24.2 Professional: Division Administration 3 4 19 Professional: Water Quality Program 8 5 9.6 Professional: Service or Product Solicitation 3 6 10.8 Referral to other division 2 1 3.6 Total: 495 388 533 SWMP Subject Matter Experts (SME): Staff from these Divisions meet with the SWMP Team as necessary to discuss programmatic issues and are comprised of the following positions: 1. Engineering Division: Team that reviews and regulates new and redevelopment projects utilizing established engineering standards and Bozeman Municipal Code. The positions include the City Engineer, Development Review Manager, and a variety of staff engineers. Primary permit responsibilities include:  Post Construction Program (SWMP Section 6.0) 2. Operations and Maintenance: Team of five positions that operate and maintain the public storm sewer network, including the inspection, maintenance, and repair of infrastructure. This group also inspects underground pipes to identify illicit discharges and illegal connections. This team includes a Superintendent, Assistant Superintendent, Foreman, and two Operators. Primary permit responsibilities include:  Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Program (SWMP Section 4.0)  Good Housekeeping Program (SWMP Section 7.0) 3. Streets Division: Numerous positions that operate the City’s street sweeping, spring and fall cleanups, and surface inlet grate obstruction removal and replacement activities. This team includes a Superintendent, Assistant Superintendent, and numerous Operators. Primary permit responsibilities include:  Good Housekeeping Program (SWMP Section 7.0) SWMP Support Divisions: Group engaged by the SWMP Team as needs arise. Support Divisions do not typically participate in reoccurring meetings unless invited to discuss a particular topic. 49 SECTION 1.0 - PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION 13 1.6 Sharing Responsibility The City and University work collaboratively on various programs, outlined further in an Memorandum Of Understanding (MOU), including:  Participation in regular meetings.  University payment of City stormwater fees, rate model update to occur during Q1 of each calendar year and an updated total should be in place by July 1.  Performance tracking and reporting.  Infrastructure project development and implementation.  Inspection forms, training, methodologies, and program documentation sharing.  Pollution event response and resolution, as requested.  Stormwater treatment unit maintenance: The City measures and removes debris collected by University stormwater mechanical treatment units and incorporates totals into SWMP Section 8.0 annually, including:  University Field House Downstream Defender Mechanical Separation Unit  11th and College Contech CDS Mechanical Separation Unit  Water Sampling and Analysis Program: The City manages the University’s portion of this program, including purchasing equipment, collecting samples/data, and analyzing results for the following:  Storm Event Monitoring  In-Stream Wet Weather Monitoring  Sediment Reduction Monitoring  Long-Term Trend Monitoring  Post Construction Program: The City completes six high-priority stormwater facility inspections on MSU property annually, and provides completed reports.  The City provides the University an updated SWMP by February 1 of each calendar year. 1.7 Collaborative Organizations The MS4 collaborates with a variety of organizations, including:  National Municipal Stormwater Alliance (NMSA): An organization formed in 2015 comprised of stormwater industry professionals that provides a unified voice for national scale policy changes, rules, issues, and initiatives.  Montana Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ): A state agency that administers and enforces the Montana Clean Water Act. MDEQ provides compliance training, conferences, and enforcement in cases where the MS4’s resources become exhausted.  Gallatin Local Water Quality District (GLWQD): A Gallatin County public agency that conducts water quality sampling and community education.  Montana State Extension Water Quality: A University Extension agency that provides water quality sampling and community education.  Montana Water Environment Association (MWEA): A Montana organization that represents water, wastewater, and stormwater professionals. MWEA is a member of the Water Environment Federation (WEF), which has over 34,000 members worldwide. WEF is working to raise knowledge regarding stormwater infrastructure, policy, and science at the national level.  Gallatin Watershed Council (GWC): An education-based nonprofit organization that works to improve waterway health by implementing the Gallatin Watershed Restoration Plan. 50 SECTION 1.0 - PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION 14 1.8 Additional Regulatory Responsibilities The following MPDES permits also fall under the purview of the MS4:  General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activity (MTR100000): Construction projects that disturb one acre or more of land must obtain a stormwater discharge authorization from the MDEQ. The MS4 implements a Construction Management Program detailed in SWMP Section 5.0  Multi-Sector General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Industrial Activity (MTR000000): The MS4’s Water Reclamation Facility (WRF) and Landfill obtain authorizations to discharge stormwater from their facilities. MS4 staff assists WRF and Landfill personnel with required inspections, BMP development, training, reporting, and records keeping. 1.9 Annual Report The MS4 submits individual Annual Report Forms, an updated SWMP, and relevant documents to the MDEQ by March 1 of each year. 1.10 Public Comments The MS4 considers and responds to all public comment related to the SWMP. To facilitate, a public comment form exists on the MS4’s website and is available year round. Also, the MS4 publicly notices the SWMP after making annual updates in the Bozeman Daily Chronicle the second and third Sundays of March during each calendar year. The MS4 has received the following comments: Table 1.10.1: Public Comments # Date Participant Comment MS4 Response 1 2/22/2021 Flooding Comment Plowing on 10th Avenue & drainage of roadway unsatistactory: The roads between 11th and 8th appear challenging to plow because of parallel parking, and are clearly not plowed enough. As a resident on 10th Avenue, I have watched numerous cars 'bottom out' and get stuck, damage the bottoms of their cars because the snow and ice accumulation in the street is too high. Additionally, the snow and ice in the street warms and drains into the low points of the resident sidewalks and driveways, consistently participating in a freeze/thaw cycle. This results in many residents constantly clearing their sidewalk only to have the street ice/snow melt and flood their sidewalks the very next day/evening. First off, ticketing residents for uncleared sidewalks is not the solution. Penalizing residents for the flooding and freezing of their sidewalks by the ice/snow in the street is not a solution. Secondly, I'd recommend more consistent plowing and better stormwater management so that water isn't kept in mini detention ponds in residents driveways and sidewalk low points. Public Works Division Operations Manager responded after consulting with Stormwater and Streets personnel. Flooding is unavoidable due to clogged inlets and plowing is difficult due to parked cars. The City agreed to watch the area and complete work as practicable. 51 SECTION 1.0 - PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION 15 2 3/2/2021 Flooding Comment The storm drain at the southeast corner of W. Babcock and S. 15th Ave. is completely clogged with frozen leaves. A neighbor and I have worked on this drain to no avail. Whoever plowed the street created a dam around it and it is really backing up on the street. Please get it flowing again. Thanks Replied to the resident, and passed the complaint on to operations. 3 3/25/2021 Detention Facility Maintenance My name is Johnny Dohner and I'm a landscape designer here in Bozeman. Unfortunately I have a concern regarding a property owner in the Ferguson Meadows Subdivision on the corner of Mineral Ave and TooleSt. Last summer I noticed a vegetation removal effort in an engineered storm water detention area performed by (I believe to be) the property owners of the adjacent lot. This is a clearly designed storm water detention pond capturing runoff from Ferguson Ave, Mineral Ave, and Toole St. It is a part of a larger network of green infrastructure throughout the subdivision and is dedicated open space per subdivision city of Bozeman open space requirements. It contained native aspens, dogwoods, and willows and was a lovely corner in this heavily developed neighborhood. All of the existing trees and shrubs were removed, and now it is a big muddy hole, void of all vegetation and not performing to the standards it was designed for. All aesthetic and functional value have been eliminated and I'm sure there will be compaction/infiltration issues from now on due to the absence of vegetation which could also negatively effect the adjacent roadways/sidewalks. It is very unfortunate and very ugly and it should be of great concern to the city if residents are "vandalizing" green infrastructure systems. I would like a response to if either the city told these residents to do this, or if they took it upon themselves to vandalize this street corner shared by the whole neighborhood. And if so, they should be held responsible for their actions and get this street corner replanted ASAP!! Also, I believe the street trees on that corner were removed by the city due to them being young green ash trees killed by the early winter onset in 2019... it is unrelated but it adds to the overall effect of this corner's loss of aesthetic and functional value. Open space and native vegetation is a benefit not only to the community as a whole, but mitigates strain on grey infrastructure, connects wildlife habitat corridors, and helps develop the city image through green infrastructure. If you could please reach out to me on this I would very much appreciate it. I do not want to verbally confront the homeowners to find out more because that could worsen the whole situation. Again, this isa bout destruction and vandalism of community open space property. I will also send this same message toagenda@bozeman.net so I can attach an image taken from the Gallatin County Interactive Map that shows property boundaries, open space designation, and the location of said destruction. Thank you for your 52 SECTION 1.0 - PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION 16 consideration and I'm sorry for ranting, but I am passionate about this and I live right next to it. 4 5/23/2022 Water Quality Mr. Oliver, my name is Hunter, I go to Bozeman Creative Center. I am in first grade. I really care about rivers. I think out city would be better if we kept our rivers clean. I have some good ideas about how we can do this! We can use shovels and take the trash out. Then I can play in the creeks without shoes on! – Hunter Walls Replied to resident thanking them for their appreciation for clean water and wanting to help. Extended an offer to joining the Adopt a Drain program. Blank Page 53 SECTION 1.0 - PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION 17 54 Section 2.0 Capital Project Program Graphic 2.0.1: Stormwater pipe replacement and repair Graphic 2.0.2: Newly installed cure-in-place liner; downtown Bozeman 55 SECTION 2.0 - CAPITAL PROJECT PROGRAM 2 Blank Page 56 SECTION 2.0 - CAPITAL PROJECT PROGRAM 3 Introduction The MS4’s Capital Project Program works to:  Increase storm sewer capacity;  Maintain the integrity of underground pipes and surface conveyances;  Replace and/or repair failing infrastructure assets; and  Meet water quality requirements set by the MDEQ. SWMP Section 2.0 details the following components necessary to administer the MS4’s Capital Project Program, including:  Total Maximum Daily Load Action Plan (2.2)  Planned Projects (2.3)  Ongoing or Completed Projects (2.4)  Pollutant Reduction Totals (2.5)  Performance Measures (2.6) Total Maximum Daily Load Action Plan The MS4 implements the following BMPs to reduce negative impacts to local waterways:  Stormwater Management Program implementation (SWMP Sections 1.0 - 8.0)  Capital Improvement Plan (SWMP Section 2.0) including mechanical separation unit installation at select direct discharge outfalls that drain large urban basins and lack treatment (SWMP Sections 2.3, 2.4, and 2.5)  Public Education Program implementation (SWMP Section 3.0), including, but not limited to: the Adopt-A-Drain Program (SWMP Section 3.4.1), Construction Training (SWMP Section 3.4.8), Lawn Care Targeted Outreach (SWMP Section 3.4.12) and the Dog Waste Campaign (SWMP Section 3.4.4)  Construction Site Management Program implementation (SWMP Section 5.0), including the prioritization and elevated inspection rates for construction sites within the impaired watersheds (SWMP Section 5.4)  Post-Construction Program implementation (SWMP Section 6.2), including the enforcement of water quality and flood control standards for new and redevelopment projects  Good Housekeeping Program implementation (SWMP Section 7.0), including regular municipal storm sewer cleaning, spring/fall cleanups, and street sweeping (SWMP Sections 2.5 and 7.2), Facility Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan execution, and Activity Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan training  Sampling and Evaluation Program implementation (SWMP Section 8.0), including the collection and analysis of stormwater runoff, in-stream water quality, BMP effectiveness, and long-term monitoring data The MS4 prioritizes the following waterways based on impairment and priority: Bozeman Creek, due to its total stormwater discharge points and impairments identified in the 2013 Lower Gallatin Planning Area TMDLs & Framework Water Quality Improvements Plan (TMDL), and the Waste Load Allocation, is a focal point for treatment. Active planning and design of additional treatment units is underway for implementation in FY 2024-2025. The capital projects plan includes treatement for:  Total Suspended Solids (TSS): Contributions from the MS4 require a 37% or 81 tons/year reduction. The TMDL does not hold the MS4 to numeric discharge limits. Instead, the TMDL 57 SECTION 2.0 - CAPITAL PROJECT PROGRAM 4 states that the MS4 will meet its Waste Load Allocation (WLA) by “adhering to the (MS4) permit requirements to minimize pollutant loads.”  Total Nitrogen: Contributions from the MS4 require a 0% reduction. The TMDL does not hold the MS4 to numeric Total Nitrogen load limits. Instead, the TMDL states that the MS4 will meet its WLA by “adhering to the (MS4) permit requirements.”  E. coli: Contributions from the MS4 require a 0% reduction. The TMDL does not hold the MS4 to numeric E. coli load limits. Instead, the TMDL states that the MS4 will meet its WLA by “adhering to the (MS4) permit requirements.” Mandeville Creek, due to its total stormwater discharge points and impairments identified in the TMDL, including:  Total Nitrogen and Total Phosphorous: Contributions from the MS4 require a 0% reduction. The TMDL does not hold the MS4 to numeric Total Nitrogen or Total Phosphorous load limits. Instead, the TMDL states that the MS4 will meet its WLA by “adhering to the (MS4) permit requirements.” The East Gallatin, due to its impairments identified in the TMDL, including:  Total Nitrogen and Total Phosphorous: Contributions from the MS4 require a 0% reduction. The TMDL does not hold the MS4 to numeric Total Nitrogen and Total Phosphorous load limits. Instead, the TMDL states that the MS4 will meet its WLA by “adhering to the (MS4) permit requirements.” Bridger Creek, due to its impairments identified in the TMDL, including:  Nitrate: Contributions from the MS4 require a 0% reduction. The TMDL does not hold the MS4 to numeric nitrate load limits. Instead, the TMDL states that the MS4 will meet its WLA by “adhering to the (MS4) permit requirements.” Other Notable Waterways: Numerous unassessed waterways exist that receive protections from the MS4’s broad programmatic efforts. These waterways include, but are not limited to, Cattail Creek, Catron Creek, Baxter Creek, Nash Spring Creek, Flat Creek, Mathew Bird Creek, Figgins Creek, and Aajker Creek. Table 2.2.1: MS4 Waterbody TMDL Impairments Total Suspended Solids (TSS) Total Nitrogen (TN) Total Phosphorus (TP) E. coli Chlorophyll-a Alteration in stream-side or littoral vegetative cover Bozeman Creek X X X X X Mandeville Creek X X Bridger Creek X X East Gallatin River X X 58 SECTION 2.0 - CAPITAL PROJECT PROGRAM 5 Capital Improvement Planning Each year, the MS4 prepares a five-year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) that outlines infrastructure projects and other capital needs. As a critical component of the TMDL Action Plan, projects that address water quality are inherent in capital project planning and the following identifies the measures and BMP’s planned to address TMDL MS4-related requirements. The CIP process is open for public comment, approved by the City Commission, and incorporated into the applicable fiscal year’s budget. The MS4 accounts for the following when preparing CIPs:  Urban waterway/watershed priority  Development and land use  Infrastructure condition analysis  Programmatic goals  Available budget  Project coordination with other stakeholders and utilities Graphic 2.2.1 – Capital Plan Budget Projection FY24-FY28 59 Planned Capital Improvement Projects Prioritization of untreated sub-basins within the Bozeman Creek watershed has been incorporated into Fiscal Year 2023-2024 planning (see Graphic 2.3.1). In addition, the MS4 plans to complete the following stormwater capital improvements in the next five years to address TMDL Action Plan requirements: Pollutant Reduction 1 Projects Infrastructure Rehabilitation 3 Projects Utility Operations 5 Projects FY24-FY28 Stormwater Capital Improvement Plan TYPE DETAIL CIP #FY23 FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 1 River Health Project - Mechanical Treatment Units (Phase 4) Design and Construction Water Quality (50% Treatment)STRH02 -300,000$ 250,000$ --- 2 Deferred Maintenance Project - Historic Pipe Replacement Design and Construction Conveyance Rehabilitation STDM04 310,000$ 300,000$ 300,000$ 339,000$ 373,000$ 391,650$ 3 Deferred Maintenance Project - Unplanned Infrastructure Rehab Design and Construction Unplanned Projects STDM05 47,250$ 49,600$ 52,000$ 54,600$ 57,300$ 60,200$ 4 Deferred Maintenance Project - Downtown Stormwater Capacity Analysis & Report Infiltration, pipe upsize or bypass STDM19 ----150,000$ 200,000$ 5 Utility Operation Project - Rate Model Study Analysis & Report Match rates from facility plan update STDM18 -50,000$ ---- 6 Utility Operation Project - Stormwater Facility Plan Phase 2 Analysis & Report Conveyance, regional connections, CIP STDM17 175,000$ ----- 7 Utility Operation Project - Pipe Inspection Van (#01)Equipment Replace 2001 Ford E350 TV Van STOP04 --325,000$ --- 8 Utility Operation Project - Service Vehicle (#01)Equipment Replace 2017 Ford F350 STOP07 ------ 9 Utility Operation Project - Vacuum and Jetting Truck (#01)Equipment Replace 2015 Vactor STOP08 ---540,000$ -- Total:532,250$ 699,600$ 927,000$ 933,600$ 580,300$ 651,850$ Y2Y % increase 31%33%1%-38%12% PROJECT Table 2.3.1: Planned and completed pollutant reduction projects 60 Pollution Reduction: Mechanical Stormwater Treatment (Phase 4)  ID: STRH02 (Phase 4)  Description: Installation of two stormwater treatment units near the intersections of N. Rouse Ave. / E. Peach St. and N. Rouse Ave. / E. Tamarack St.  Alternatives Considered: Staff has not identified an alternative treatment approach with comparable maintenance ease, construction footprint, or pollutant removal efficiency.  Advantages of Approval: The units will collect over 27-tons of pollutants annually from 193- acres. These projects address Bozeman Creek watershed Waste Load Allocation (TSS) and are critical for the TMDL Action Plan.  Additional Operating Cost in the Future: Staff will complete maintenance semi-annually using existing vacuuming equipment and drying beds. Debris will eventually be disposed at the landfill. Infrastructure Rehabilitation: Historic Pipe Replacement Program  ID: STDM04  Description: Rehabilitation of 100-year-old vitrified clay storm sewer, which has exceeded its life cycle, does not meet modern capacity standards, and includes many structural failures.  Alternatives Considered: The infrastructure is a critical component of the City’s storm sewer network. Delay will increase chances of collapse, road failure, and flooding.  Advantages of Approval: This project is preventative and targets pipes prone to failure and surcharging. Rehabilitation will reduce risks by addressing structural and capacity deficiencies.  Additional Operating Cost in the Future: Stormwater Personnel will complete maintenance on a reoccurring schedule, including flushing, vacuuming, and inspection. Infrastructure Rehabilitation: Annual Unplanned Pipe Rehabilitation and Drainage Projects  ID: STDM05  Description: An annual program that provides funding for the design and construction of unplanned pipe, drainage, and treatment projects.  Alternatives Considered: Use of internal crews and equipment to complete work. Staff determined the workload required would reduce capacity applied towards critical services.  Advantages of Approval: Unplanned funds allows staff to be responsive to essential needs, increasing customer service, improving system efficiency, and reducing City liability.  Additional Operating Cost in the Future: Stormwater personnel will complete the maintenance of rehabilitated, repaired, or new infrastructure concurrently with existing public assets. Infrastructure Rehabilitation: Downtown Stormwater Capacity  ID: STDM19  Description: Results of the stormwater facility plan in FY23 will recommend ways to increase capacity and improve water quality in the downtown area.  Alternatives Considered: To be determined by facility plan update and future decisions on level of service  Advantages of Approval: Better level of service, public safety and water quality depending on which technology is utilized. Infiltration-based BMPs will be targeted based on available space within the Bozeman Creek Watershed. These projects will treat a relatively small area for water quality compared to the mechanical separator projects, but will also help water quantity. 61 SECTION 2.0 - CAPITAL PROJECT PROGRAM 8  Additional Operating Cost in the Future: Stormwater personnel will complete the maintenance of rehabilitated, repaired, or new infrastructure concurrently with existing public assets. Utility Operations: Rate Model Study  ID: STDM18  Description: Rate model study will follow Facilities Plan completion. Any gap between level of service and other goals from current status will be covered by future rates  Alternatives Considered: Rates fund the Stormwater Division. Delaying the funding of capital projects will increase of infrastructure failure and limit the ability of operations to perform work  Advantages of Approval: Adequate rates will allow capital plan to keep up with growth, improve water quality, public safety and maintain compliance with permits  Additional Operating Cost in the Future: This project will fund the division Utility Operations: Stormwater Facility Plan Phase 2  ID: STDM17  Description: The first phase of the facility plan is under way for 2022. Results will better inform the scope of the second phase and complete a number of recommendations based on modeling and comparison to strategies and technologies used in other cities.  Alternatives Considered: Status quo requires more staff input and less informed decision making  Advantages of Approval: Direction for future capital projects, better model to determine capacity, and other results will lead to more efficient allocation of resources  Additional Operating Cost in the Future: Costs are not directly tied to the results of the plan. Costs for plan recommendations will be addressed individually Utility Operations: Street Sweeper  ID: STOP05  Description: Replacement of a mechanical street sweeper leased in 2015.  Alternatives Considered: Use the existing street sweeper, potentially leading to increased downtown and maintenance. Industry guidance recommends replacing municipal sweepers every five years.  Advantages of Approval: Street sweeping protects air and water quality and maintains permit standing for the MS4. The removal of sand reduces slip and skid hazards for motorists, bicyclists and pedestrians.  Additional Operating Cost in the Future: The stormwater division will fund operation and maintenance costs. The sweeper supplements the cleaning programs led by the streets division. Utility Operations: Administrative Vehicle #1  ID: STOP03  Description: Acquisition of addition administrative vehicle with growing division staff numbers.  Alternatives Considered: The stormwater division as five administrative employees who share three vehicles. Logistics have become a hindrance to maintaining inspection and other travel needs. 62 SECTION 2.0 - CAPITAL PROJECT PROGRAM 9  Advantages of Approval: Provides for a reliable and safe vehicle for staff to complete daily activities, such as pollution mitigation, equipment transport, flood response, and field inspections.  Additional Operating Cost in the Future: The stormwater division will fund operation and maintenance costs. Utility Operations: Pipe Inspection Van  ID: STOP04  Description: Replacement of the pipe inspection van purchased in 2001 and refurbished in 2015. The vehicle’s chassis is heavily worn and the onboard computer system is aged.  Alternatives Considered: Continue to use the existing vehicle, which could result in downtime and increasingly costly maintenance.  Advantages of Approval: The vehicle facilitates the City’s pipe inspection program, which identifies maintenance needs, locates structural deficiencies, and detects illegal connections.  Additional Operating Cost in the Future: The Stormwater Division will fund operation and maintenance costs. Utility Operations: Service Vehicle  ID: STOP07  Description: Replacement of staff's 2016 Ford F350 service vehicle.  Alternatives Considered: Stormwater division has three operations employees that share one service vehicle. Delaying replacement would result in increased down time and maintenance costs.  Advantages of Approval: Provides for a reliable and safe vehicle for staff to complete daily activities, such as infrastructure inspection and project management  Additional Operating Cost in the Future: The stormwater division will fund operation and maintenance costs. Utility Operations: Vacuum and Jetting Truck (#01)  ID: STOP08  Description: Replacement of the Division’s vacuum and jetting truck purchased in 2015.  Alternatives Considered: Continue using the existing vehicle, which will result in downtime and increasingly costly maintenance.  Advantages of Approval: The vehicle facilitates infrastructure maintenance, pollution event cleanup, and vacuum excavation for pipe repairs.  Additional Operating Cost in the Future: The Stormwater Division will fund operation and maintenance costs. Ongoing and/or Completed Projects The MS4 has or is in the process of completing the following projects: Utility Operation Program: Stormwater Facilities Plan Update  Purpose: Update the City’s 2008 Stormwater Facilities Plan to provide modern policy, programmatic, and infrastructure recommendations for future implementation.  Type: Planning document  Treatment Efficiency: n/a  Treatment Area: n/a 63 SECTION 2.0 - CAPITAL PROJECT PROGRAM 10  Discharge Location: n/a  Date of Completion: Mid-2022  Co-Benefit(s): n/a Pipe Rehabilitation Program: Downtown Trunk Line Rehabilitation  Purpose: Rehabilitate a historical storm sewer trunk line (See Graphic 2.0.2, section cover)  Type: CIPP liner 1,233’  Treatment Efficiency: n/a  Treatment Area: n/a  Discharge Location: Bozeman Creek  Date of Completion: Summer 2022  Co-Benefit(s): Improved public safety Pipe Rehabilitation Program: Manley Ditch Rehabilitation  Purpose: Rehabilitate a historical irrigation drainage ditch and convey drainage from a 58- acre urban area to the Cherry Creek Fishing Access property.  Type: Ditch rehabilitation, bio-retention treatment areas, and flood control weirs  Treatment Efficiency: n/a  Treatment Area: n/a  Discharge Location: Cherry Creek  Date of Completion: Ongoing; 2023  Co-Benefit(s): Improved public safety, enhanced water quality Pipe Rehabilitation Program: Pipe Lining (Cleveland and Tracy)  Purpose: Critical Pipe Replacement  Type: 18” HDPE  Expected Treatment Efficiency: n/a  Treatment Area: 20’  Discharge Location: Matthew Bird Creek  Date of Completion: Ongoing; completion 2023  Co-Benefits: n/a The MS4 targets and reduces discharge to impaired waterbodies via implementation of BMPs and through additional TMDL-related monitoring, but is not limited to impaired waterbodies without an approved TMDL. The maps below detail present and future locations of treatment units and pipe rehabilitation locations through FY25. Section 2.5 details the BMPs used to target and reduce discharges to impaired waterbodies, and quantifies reduction totals for treatment units by waterbody. 64 SECTION 2.0 - CAPITAL PROJECT PROGRAM 11 Graphic 2.4.1: Planned and completed pollutant reduction projects 65 SECTION 2.0 - CAPITAL PROJECT PROGRAM 12 Graphic 2.4.2: Planned and completed pollutant reduction projects 66 SECTION 2.0 - CAPITAL PROJECT PROGRAM 13 Pollutant Reduction Totals Based on the TMDL, the WLA and the Action Plan, goals for pollution reduction focus on total suspended solids (TSS) reduction, primarily through installation of mechanical separators, either retrofitted into existing storm systems, or specified during road reconstruction efforts. The MS4 tracks pollutant reduction totals using a variety of data tracking mechanisms:  Total Suspended Solids  Treatment Unit Maintenance: The MS4 calculates tonnage totals by calculating debris volume within each unit before cleaning and converts the volume to tons by using an assumed sand weight ratio of .056 tons = 1 cubic foot of sand. Table 2.5.1: Treatment Unit Maintenance Pollution Reduction Totals Watershed 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Bozeman Creek 41 Tons 50 Tons 43 Tons - - Mandeville Creek 8 Tons 6 Tons 6 Tons - - East Gallatin River 6 Tons 7 Tons 7 Tons - - Total: 55 Tons 65 Tons 56 Tons - - Table 2.5.2: 2022 Treatment Unit Totals by Location Location Type Acres Tons Tons/Acre Comment Bozeman Creek Drainage Main and N. 3rd Mech. Sep. 93 3.85 0.04 50% treated Main and N. Grand Mech. Sep. 58 2.85 0.05 50% treated Main and N. Tracy Mech. Sep. 32 4.19 0.13 50% treated City Shops 1 Mech. Sep. 1 0.84 0.84 50% treated N. Wallace and E. Tamarack Mech. Sep. 81 5.15 0.06 50% treated S. Rouse and E. Lincoln Mech. Sep. 32 2.11 0.07 50% treated S. Rouse and E. Olive Mech. Sep. 9 1.44 0.16 50% treated Perkins and E. Peach Mech. Sep. 23 2.90 0.13 50% treated Main and N. Bozeman Mech. Sep. 25 4.19 0.17 50% treated Main and N. Black Mech. Sep. 28 4.81 0.17 50% treated Main and S. Church Mech. Sep. 26 2.10 0.08 50% treated Mason and Tracy Infiltration 2 0.26 0.13 100% treated N. Rouse and E. Mendenhall Mech. Sep. 3 0.27 0.09 50% treated N. Rouse and E. Lamme (E) Mech. Sep. 3 0.04 0.01 50% treated N. Rouse and E. Lamme (W) Mech. Sep. 6 0.04 0.01 50% treated N. Rouse and E. Peach Mech. Sep. 3 1.27 0.42 50% treated N. Rouse and E. Tamarack Mech. Sep. 9 0.11 0.01 50% treated N. Rouse and E. Birch Mech. Sep. 9 1.35 0.15 50% treated Westridge Mech. Sep. 23 2.86 0.12 50% treated City Shops 2 Infiltration 1 1.69 1.69 100% treated Parking Garage Alley Mech. Sep. 1 0.40 0.40 50% treated Total: 468 acres 42.72 tons 0.23 tons/ac 67 SECTION 2.0 - CAPITAL PROJECT PROGRAM 14 Mandeville Creek Drainage N. 11th and W. Lamme Mech. Sep. 7 1.00 0.14 50% treated University Field House Mech. Sep. 6 0.56 0.09 50% treated College and 11th Mech. Sep. 58 4.78 0.08 50% treated Total: 71 acres 6.34 tons 0.11 tons/ac East Gallatin River Drainage Bridger Center Dr (MDT) Mech. Sep. 12 0.77 0.06 50% treated Griffin Dr (MDT) Mech. Sep. 14 2.64 0.19 50% treated Manley and Gallatin Park Mech. Sep. 3 0.24 0.08 50% treated Plum and Avocado Infiltration 14 1.78 0.13 100% treated Griffin 7th Mech. Sep. 1.84 Total: 43 acres 7.27 tons 0.11 tons/ac  Storm Sewer Maintenance: The MS4 calculates tonnage totals by calculating the depth of debris vacuumed out of manholes and inlets before cleaning. The MS4 multiplies the area of each assets sump by an assumed 1/2 full depth measurement, multiplies the volume by the total assets maintained for that year, and converts the volume to tons by using an assumed sand weight ratio of .056 tons = 1 cubic foot. Table 2.5.3: Storm Sewer Maintenance Pollution Reduction Totals Entity 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 City of Bozeman 131 Tons 130 118 - - Montana State University 38 Tons 48 - - - Total: 169 Tons 178 - - -  Street Sweeping: The Streets Division tracks actual tons of sweepings, leaves, branches, and other debris. Trucks are weighed as they haul the material away. Table 2.5.4: Street Sweeping Pollution Reduction Totals Entity 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 City of Bozeman 5,127 tons 3,337 tons 2,672 tons - - Montana State University 195 tons 195 tons - - - Total: 5,322 tons 3,532 tons - - - Currently, the Stormwater Division tracks tons of debris removed from the Bozeman Creek Watershed on a year-to-year basis. Variations in removal rates and yearly totals are affected by numerous factors. The efficacy of treatment units (mechanical separators) vary depending on precipitation patterns, traction sand application, timing of street sweeping and other factors. In planning for future expenditures, we have planned years with no water quality treatment projects which allow the city to invest in updated pneumatic vacuums and sewer monitoring equipment. These off years also allow time to determine effectiveness of recently installed BMPs and determine location and design new mechanical separators in the Bozeman Creek watershed. Prior to the establishment of WLA, little or no quantification of sediment reduction possibilities occurred. 68 SECTION 2.0 - CAPITAL PROJECT PROGRAM 15 Performance Measures The MS4 utilizes performance measures to evaluate programmatic strategies with the goal of optimizing limited resources, increasing efficiencies, and balancing annual workloads. Stormwater Report Card: Final Grade generated by the MS4 that provides a consistent and communicable method for tracking stream health improvement and permit compliance risk. The MS4’s target level of service is to facilitate an upward trend annually, which is calculated using the methods described in SWMP Section 8.0. One portion of the 2022 letter grade is awaiting lab results. The most likely score is reported above and will be updated when final results are produced. Table 2.6.1: Stormwater Report Card Score Calendar Year Score (%) Score (Grade) 2018 61% D 2019 54% F 2020 65% D 2021 63% D 2022 60% D Community Safety and Urban Flood Risk: Tracking mechanism utilized by the MS4 that provides a consistent and communicable method for tracking community safety and urban flood risk. The MS4’s target level of service is to have zero insurance claims filed annually as a result of public storm sewer deficiencies. There have been no flood-related claims between 2018 and 2022. The MS4 maintains the following performance metrics to track Capital Project Program progress and identify future needs: Pollutant Reduction Program: Comply with the MS4’s stormwater permit and improve water quality by preventing the discharge of 81 tons per year of TSS into the Bozeman Creek watershed. 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 '17-'20 Avg 2022 Street Sweeping Collected (tons)Storm Maint (tons)Calendar Year Stormwater Pollutant Collection TotalsStorm Maintenance Treatment Units Street Sweeping Graphic 2.5.1: Pollutant Reduction Totals Chart 69 SECTION 2.0 - CAPITAL PROJECT PROGRAM 16  Benefit: Reduced permit noncompliance risk, improved public safety, and a healthier environment.  Driving Policy: Bronze Level of Service  Risk: Permit requirements subject to change Table 2.6.2: Pollutant Reduction Program Performance Type 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 TSS removed (% of 81 tons) 51% 61% 53% - - Pipe Rehabilitation Program: Replace 13.9 miles of structurally deficient and undersized historical storm sewer infrastructure throughout the downtown core.  Benefit: Reduced urban flooding and improved public safety  Driving Policy: Bronze Level of Service  Risk: Increasing construction costs Table 2.6.3: Pipe Rehabilitation Program Performance Type Prior to 2021 2021 2022 2023 2024 Miles completed (total) 4.5 4.5 5.2 - - Utility Operation Program: Maintain 20% of City-owned storm sewer assets annually (excludes MSU). Totals include inlet maintenance, manhole maintenance, pipe maintenance, and pipe inspection.  Benefit: Reduced urban flooding, extended infrastructure lifecycles, and improved environmental health.  Driving Policy: Bronze Level of Service  Risk: Rapid Growth changes the total required to be maintained. Less frequent maintenance could have impacts to water quality or level of service. Table 2.6.4: Utility Operation Program Performance Type 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Utility Operation 21% 17% 19% 18% 11% 70 SECTION 2.0 - CAPITAL PROJECT PROGRAM 17 Blank Page 71 Section 3.0 Public Education Program Graphic 3.0.2: Dog waste station with educational signage Graphic 3.0.1: Construction field academy 72 SECTION 3.0 - PUBLIC EDUCATION PROGRAM 2 Blank Page 73 SECTION 3.0 - PUBLIC EDUCATION PROGRAM 3 3.1 Introduction The MS4 strives to improve waterway health, protect public safety, and comply with its MS4 Permit through the education of the public by:  Passively engaging residents through the consistent supply of educational information; and  Actively engaging residents, providing them tools to take direct action. SWMP Section 3.0 details the following components necessary to administer the MS4’s Public Education Program, including:  Education Protocol (3.2)  Key Target Audiences (3.3)  Ongoing Initiatives (3.4)  Future and Deferred Opportunities (3.5) 3.2 Education Protocol The MS4 educates audiences on stormwater-related issues to reduce the public’s contribution of pollutants to waterbodies using the following strategies: Passive Engagement (Education): Creation and distribution of educational messages, targeting pollutant-generating activities and behaviors distributed via the following platforms:  Website  Utility bill inserts  Social media  Brochures  Educational signage  Vehicle wraps  Surveys Active Engagement (Involvement and Enforcement): Customized interpersonal interactions with various audiences, targeting pollutant-generating activities and behaviors distributed via the following activities:  Presentations/Meetings  Trainings  Tours  Activities  Clean-up Events  Penalties 3.3 Key Target Audiences The MS4 targets key audiences since they conduct activities that result in stormwater pollution, including: Table 3.3.1: Key Target Audiences Target Audience Pollutant(s) Activity Rationale Engagement Initiatives Residents Nutrients, E. coli, TSS Yard Maintenance SWMP Sec. 8.9 Passive/Active SWMP Sec. 3.4 Construction Industry TSS Construction SWMP Sec. 5.6 Passive/Active SWMP Sec. 3.4 Youth/MSU Students Nutrients, E. coli, TSS Education and class projects Paradigm shift, trickle up impact Active SWMP Sec. 3.4 HOAs - Home Owner Associations Nutrients, E. coli, TSS Facility Maintenance SWMP Sec. 6.8 Passive/Active SWMP Sec. 3.4 Carpet Cleaning Firms Wash Waste Dumping SWMP Sec. 4.4 Active SWMP Sec. 3.5 Pet Owners E.coli Dog waste SWMP Sec. 8.2 Active/Passive SWMP Sec. 3.4 74 SECTION 3.0 - PUBLIC EDUCATION PROGRAM 4 3.4 Ongoing Initiatives The MS4 completes initiatives to engage, educate, and promote sustainable behavior of its key target audiences. Ongoing initiatives include: Adopt-a-Drain: A program that actively engages watershed champions, and provides a tool to make a measurable difference in their neighborhoods by periodically cleaning debris from adopted storm sewer inlets. The program also passively engages residents by creating an environment where stormwater-related issues can be discussed and acted upon at a neighborhood level, rather than the City acting as the sole information provider.  Key Audience: Residents  Strategy: Active and Passive Engagement  Treatment Area: Citywide  Distribution Channels: Recruitment, training, troubleshooting, and engagement  Performance Measure: Total weight of debris collected annually Table 3.4.1: Adopt a Storm Drain Program Summary Year Task Task Outcome Performance Measure Notes 2019 Implement pilot program Complete 773 lbs. Time intensive but effective program, 11 Residents cared for 21 inlets. 2020 Implement program, retain majority of the recruited residents, explore expansion Complete 1,362 lbs. Covid-19 affected ability to engage residents, many participants started strong but tapered in their efforts mid-year, 14 residents cared for 30 inlets. 2021 Maintain online portal, retain majority of the recruited residents, develop expansion plan Complete 90 lbs. Online registration and debris collection portal resulted in a decrease of debris being reported. Increase staff engagement with participants in 2022. 2022 Maintain online portal, retain majority of the recruited residents, develop expansion plan Complete UNK Residents are not reporting debris totals on the online portal. Increase advertising and switch to in-person pick-up in 2023. 2023 Maintain online portal, retain and recruit new members, implement in-person debris pick- ups. - - - Educational Stormwater Video: Seven-minute video that describes the MS4’s Program, the context for why stormwater is important, and ways residents/property owners can make a difference. Residents view the video on the City’s website.  Key Audience: Residents  Strategy: Passive Engagement  Treatment Area: Citywide  Distribution Channels: MS4 website and email signature attachment  Performance Measure: Maintain video on website and use in Staff awareness training. 75 SECTION 3.0 - PUBLIC EDUCATION PROGRAM 5 Table 3.4.2: Educational Stormwater Video Summary Year Task Task Outcome Performance Measure Notes 2017 Maintain video Complete 179 Views 12 hours watch time, 4:02 average duration 2018 Maintain video Complete 502 Views 31 hours watch time, 3:42 average view duration 2019 Maintain video, add to City Channel Not Complete 214 Views 14.1 hours watch time, 3:57 average view duration. Video not added to City channel. 2020 Maintain video, add to City Channel, promote using Facebook Not Complete 167 Views Moved video to different viewing service in September, shifted training platform that no longer uses YouTube and results in views. Video not added to City channel. 2021 Maintain video, add to City Channel Not Complete Not Met Video has not been added to City Channel. 2022 Maintain video on website Complete Met Video is maintained on website and used for Staff awareness trainings. 2023 Maintain video on website. Use video for Staff awareness training. - - - Dog Waste Campaign: Campaign devoted to educating residents about the importance of dog waste collection and disposal. The campaign includes the deployment and maintenance of educational signage and dog waste stations in numerous parks and trail corridors.  Key Audience: Residents  Strategy: Passive and Active Engagement  Treatment Area: Citywide  Distribution Channels: Strategic signage and waste stations placed in high use areas.  Performance Measure: Tonnage tracked annually by calculating the total amount of dog waste collected at all waste stations. The MS4 derives the total by multiplying the total waste station bags collected by 10 lbs., which is the assumed weight of each bag. Table 3.4.3: Dog Waste Campaign Summary Year Task Task Outcome Performance Measure Notes 2017 Maintain stations Complete 19.5 Tons n/a 2018 Maintain stations Complete 20.6 Tons n/a 2019 Maintain stations, add urban specific signs in 4 locations Complete 18.2 Tons 27% drop in visits from 2018, meaning bags likely filled up more and replaced less often due to staffing shortages 2020 Maintain stations Complete 17.6 Tons Increased cleanout visitation by Park’s Staff; however, COVID-19 impacts. 2021 Maintain stations Complete 17 Tons Work orders not available, but estimated same as 2020 2022 Maintain stations Complete - - 2023 Maintain stations, install additional signs - - - 76 SECTION 3.0 - PUBLIC EDUCATION PROGRAM 6 Vehicle Decal Wraps: Educational signage installed on the MS4’s Vactor truck and street sweeper that visually displays the connection between urban areas and waterways.  Key Audience: Residents  Targeted Pollutant(s): E.coli, nutrients, oil, grease, floatables, and sediment  Strategy: Passive Engagement  Treatment Area: Citywide  Distribution Channel: Vehicle use  Performance Measure: Stormwater operator hours Table 3.4.4: Vehicle Decal Wrap Summary Year Task Task Outcome Performance Measure Notes 2017 Maintain decals Complete 4,300 hours - 2018 Maintain decals Complete 5,400 hours - 2019 Maintain decals Complete 4,100 hours Staffing shortages prevalent through 2019. 2020 Maintain decals Complete 3,400 hours Staffing shortages prevalent through 2020. 2021 Maintain decals Complete 3,600 hours Staffing shortages prevalent through 2021. 2022 Maintain decals Complete 3,900 hours 2023 Maintain decals - - - Website: Website that includes a variety of information, spanning from what stormwater is, how to report a pollution event, construction stormwater permits, rate model information, post- construction design standards, and more. Address: www.bozeman.net/departments/utilities/stormwater  Key Target Audience: Residents, Home Owner Associations, and Contractors  Strategy: Passive Engagement  Treatment Area: Citywide  Distribution Channels: Available to the public via the internet  Performance Measure: Total unique page views tracked by Google Analytics. Table 3.4.5: Website Summary Year Task Task Outcome Performance Measure Notes 2017 Maintain website Complete 677 Views 2018 Maintain website Complete 1,225 Views 2019 Maintain website Complete 2,408 Views Most Visitations: Homepage, Construction, and Contact Us 2020 Maintain website, update periodically Complete 4,700 Views Most Visitations: Homepage, Construction, and Contact Us 2021 Maintain website, update periodically Complete 5,603 Views Most Visitations: Homepage, Construction, and Contact Us 2022 Maintain website, update periodically Complete 5157 Views Most Visitations: Homepage, Construction, and Contact Us 2023 Maintain an update website with 2022 Annual Summary - - - 77 SECTION 3.0 - PUBLIC EDUCATION PROGRAM 7 General Outreach: Information developed by the MS4 and applied in various settings focused on providing general stormwater information and soliciting public participation.  Key Audience: Residents  Strategy: Active and Passive Engagement  Treatment Area: Citywide  Distribution Channels: Presentations, conferences, community events, and advertisements  Performance Measure: Total events o 2017: 10 (Green Drinks Event, MSU Class Presentations, GLWQD Board Presentation, (2) MSAWWA Conference Presentation, SWMBIA Home Show Booth, Environment Summit Community Event, Water Works Art Initiative, Gallatin Watershed Sourcebook, Breaking Ground Advertisement) o 2018: 15 (Montana DNRC Water Summit Presentation, MDEQ Stormwater Conference Presentation, MDEQ Stormwater Conference Tour, Parade of Homes Garden Tour, Gallatin College Presentation, MSU Landscape School Presentation, Stream Team Training, City Commission Emergency Ordinance Presentation, City Commission Capital and Budget Presentation, Gallatin Watershed Sourcebook Creation and Distribution, Water and Society Class Presentation, Horticulture 201 Stormwater Design Project, (2) Student-Led Campus Cleanup Events: Loose Litter and Cigarettes, Campus Cleanup Event) o 2019: 17 (City of Bozeman Planning Board Presentation, Lives and Landscapes Article, Raccoon Facebook Post, Arbor Day Event, Mountain Outlaw Article, S. Church Traffic Calming, MSU Teacher Tour, Water School Presentation, MSU EENG 341 Class Presentation, Active Aging Week Presentation, Eagle Scout Stenciling Project, Montana Stormwater Committee Webinar, Water and Society Class Presentation, Water Hydrology Class Presentation, Hort. 201 Stormwater Design Project, Health Advancement Butt Clean-Up Day, and Campus Clean Up Event) o 2020: 12 (CATs Project #2, CATs Project #3, Grass Clippings Mailer, City of Bozeman Climate Action Plan, MSU HORT 440 Class Project Review, Commission Budget Presentation, City Clerk Training, Water and Society Class Presentation, Water Hydrology Class Presentation, Hort 201 Stormwater Design Project, Campus Clean- Up Event, Arbor Day Plantings along Mandeville Creek) o 2021: 3 (Gallatin Local Water Quality District Board Presentation, Gallatin Watershed Council, and University of Montana Stormwater Management Team Permeable Pavers Presentation) o 2022: Gallatin Watershed Council Presentation and 35th Annual Bozeman Earth Day Celebration. Construction Training: Trainings that educate contractors on proper selection and use of best management practices (BMPs) and permit preperation. The MS4 holds training tailored to various education levels, construction activities, and inspection procedures. Further, the MS4 maintains a Construction Program that includes permits and materials for this group (SWMP Section 5.0).  Key Audience: Contractors and Engineers  Strategy: Active and Passive Engagement  Treatment Area: Citywide  Distribution Channels: BMP Manual, annual training, and lunch and learns 78 SECTION 3.0 - PUBLIC EDUCATION PROGRAM 8  Performance Measure: Number of industry professionals trained and annual construction- site audit earned score (see SWMP Section 5.4) Table 3.4.6: Construction Training Year Task Task Outcome Performance Measure Notes 2018 Hold trainings Complete 84 Trained 33% Audit Score Five construction training held. 2019 Hold trainings Complete 70 Trained 28% Audit Score Three construction training held. 2020 Hold trainings Not Complete N/A Scheduled classes cancelled due to Covid-19 meeting regulations. 2021 Hold trainings Not Complete N/A No trainings held due to Covid-19 meeting regulations. 2022 Hold training Complete 26 Trained 69% Audit Score Three online construction trainings held. 2023 Hold training - - - Project WET Curriculum: Class exercises taught by 5th-grade teachers in Bozeman School District (BSD) classrooms, educating students on stormwater-related issues, utilizing customized, and location-specific lesson plans and activities. The City’s Park’s Division also uses the lesson plans for their summer camps.  Key Audience: Residents  Strategy: Active Engagement  Treatment Area: Entire MS4  Distribution Channel: Trainings for teachers who then present lessons to students  Performance Measure: Total student participants Table 3.4.7: Project WET Curriculum Summary Year Task Task Outcome Performance Measure Notes 2018 Coordinate Classroom Use Complete 526 Students - 2019 Coordinate Classroom and Camp Use Not Complete 0 Spent year incorporating into the BSD curriculum. 2020 Coordinate Classroom and Camp Use Not Complete 0 Program discontinued until Covid-19 regulations lift. 2021 Contract with Montana Outdoor Science School for program implementation Not Complete 0 Plan to implement in 2022. Scope is on agenda for City Commission approval on 1/25/2022. 2022 Contract with Montana Outdoor Science School (MOSS) for program implementation Complete 173 Students Six classrooms at three schools participated resulting in 173 students educated. 2023 Continue program with MOSS - - - 79 SECTION 3.0 - PUBLIC EDUCATION PROGRAM 9 Post-Construction Stormwater Program: Tailored outreach that educates HOA Boards and management representatives on the proper function and maintenance of stormwater basins. The MS4 maintains a Post-Construction Program that includes processes and materials tailored to this group further described in SWMP Section 6.0.  Key Audience: Home Owner Associations and Property Management Companies  Strategy: Active and Passive Engagement  Treatment Area: Citywide  Distribution Channels: Participation in facility tours, board meetings, annual assemblies, and development of educational information  Performance Measure: Number of HOAs educated and inspected and the Annual post- construction audit earned score (see SWMP Section 6.4) Table 3.4.8: Post-Construction Stormwater Program Summary Year Task Task Outcome Performance Measure Notes 2022 Educated Post- Construction Facility Owners Complete 4 HOAs 3 Private 34 Total Facilities Inspected 2023 2024 2025 2026 Lawn Care Targeted Outreach: Educate residents on best practices related to lawn mowing.  Key Audience: Residents  Strategy: Passive Engagement  Treatment Area: Entire MS4  Distribution Channels: Mailer sent with a monthly utility bill.  Performance Measure: Send mailer to all utility accounts. Table 3.4.9: Lawn Care Targeted Outreach Summary Year Task Task Outcome Performance Measure Notes 2020 Distribute a mailer to residents Complete Sent Fall 2020 First year tracking this metric. 2021 Distribute a Mailer Not Complete Not Met Mailers planned for distribution in 2022 2022 Distribute Mailer Complete 16,000 Mailers Partnered with Water Conservation Division and mailers were delivered to 16,000 utility accounts as a bill insert. 2023 Distribute Mailer - - - Adopt a Rain Garden: A program that actively engages watershed champions, and provides a tool to make a measurable difference in their neighborhoods by periodically cleaning debris and maintaining vegetation in adopted rain gardens. The program also passively engages residents by creating an environment where stormwater-related issues can be discussed and acted upon at a neighborhood level, rather than the City acting as the sole information provider.  Key Audience: Residents and businesses 80 SECTION 3.0 - PUBLIC EDUCATION PROGRAM 10  Strategy: Active and Passive Engagement  Treatment Area: Citywide  Distribution Channels: Recruitment, training, troubleshooting, and engagement  Performance Measure: Adopt all rain gardens Table 3.4.10: Adopt a Rain Garden Targeted Outreach Summary Year Task Task Outcome Performance Measure Notes 2021 Clean and dispose debris from adopted rain garden Complete 1 Rain Garden Adopted WGM Group employees adopted and cleaned the Mason and Tracy infiltration boulevard. 2022 Clean and dispose debris from adopted rain garden Not Complete 1 Rain Garden Adopted Rain garden is adopted but not maintained in 2022. 2023 Clean and dispose debris from adopted rain garden - - - 3.5 Completed / Discontinued Initiatives 1. Carpet Cleaning Targeted Outreach: Educate local carpet cleaning and restoration companies on proper disposal methods and potential enforcement penalties for illicit discharges to the storm sewer system.  Key Audience: Carpet Cleaning and Restoration Companies  Strategy: Active Engagement  Treatment Area: Entire MS4  Distribution Channels: Written and verbal correspondence  Performance Measure: Illicit discharge reports related to targeted activities Table 3.5.1: Carpet Cleaning Targeted Outreach Summary Year Task Task Outcome Performance Measure Notes 2018 n/a n/a 1 1 carpet cleaning company discharge. 2019 Distribute a letter to owners Complete 0 Increased engagement yielded a good result. 2020 N/A Complete 0 - 2021 N/A Complete 0 Successful. No discharges documented since 2019. Outreach will not continue unless a discharge is documented. 3.6 Future and Deferred Initiatives The following items represent future initiatives for the MS4: Resaurant oil and grease storage and disposal. One spill in 2022 resulted in the installation of more stable storage containers. A coordinated effort to reach the wider industry with Sewer staff is pending. 81 SECTION 3.0 - PUBLIC EDUCATION PROGRAM 11 CATs Program: Collaborative program where MSU students complete projects in support of the City’s goals. Projects typically span a semester and include a variety of activities. Several have been proposed and outlined, but none are currently underway. Solid Waste Clean Up Bozeman: Existing program needs a tracking mechanism developed Water Conservation: Irrigation assessment audits Explore promotion of hazardous household waste disposal and oil/antifreeze disposal 82 SECTION 3.0 - PUBLIC EDUCATION PROGRAM 12 Blank Page 83 Section 4.0 Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Program Graphic 4.0.2: Illicit connection confirmation Graphic 4.0.1: Bentonite slurry spill 84 SECTION 4.0 – ILLICIT DISCHARGE DETECTION AND ELIMINATION PROGRAM 2 Blank Page 85 SECTION 4.0 – ILLICIT DISCHARGE DETECTION AND ELIMINATION PROGRAM 3 4.1 Introduction The MS4 strives to improve waterway health, protect public safety, and comply with its MS4 Permit through the identification and elimination of pollutant sources by:  Completing dry weather screening of outfalls;  Inspecting the storm sewer for illegal connections;  Responding to and resolving pollution events; and  Enforcing municipal ordinances prohibiting illegal dumping. SWMP Section 4.0 details the following components necessary to administer the MS4’s Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Program, including:  Regulatory Framework (4.2)  Illicit Discharge Detection and Corrective Action Plan (4.3)  Enforcement Response Plan (4.4)  Event Tracking (4.5)  Non-Stormwater Discharge Evaluation (4.6)  Outfall Reconnaissance Inventory (4.7)  Storm Sewer Infrastructure Viewer (4.8) 4.2 Regulatory Framework Pursuant to §40.04.200 Bozeman Municipal Code (BMC), it shall be unlawful to discharge or cause to be discharged into the MS4 any materials, including, but not limited to, pollutants or waters containing any pollutants that cause or contribute to a violation of applicable water quality standards or that could cause the city to be in violation of its MPDES. It shall be unlawful to store, handle, or apply any pollutant in a manner that will cause exposure to rainfall or runoff and discharge to the MS4 and to state waters or waters of the United States. An interlocal agreement covers emergency response between MSU and the City. Hazardous materials response services are provided to MSU by the City from Fire Station No. 2. 4.3 Illicit Discharge Detection and Corrective Action Plan The MS4 uses the following Corrective Action Plan (CAP) to determine event priority, formulate a response, and, if necessary, pursue enforcement: Assign an Event Coordinator (EC). Investigate to determine pollutant type and severity (site visit and correspondence). Methods for investigation include:  Field observation (in person, CCTV, ORI).  Sampling and analysis (grab sample, turbidimeter, multi-parameter probe (pH and temperature), and ammonia test strips).  Infrastructure analysis (GIS, plats, and record drawings).  Dye testing.  Correspondence with property owners. Determine an event tier and response based on the following thresholds: 86 SECTION 4.0 – ILLICIT DISCHARGE DETECTION AND ELIMINATION PROGRAM 4  Tier 1 Event: Minimal impact to public safety, infrastructure, and environment. Spills with a major dimension less than six feet and non-continuous. Outfalls and illicit connections deemed potential sources of pollution. Response includes: o Team: MS4 Staff and Code Compliance Officer o Timeline: Initiate response within five days o Resolution: MS4 Operations and/or contracted restoration firm. o Pollutant Disposal: Public, Sediment/Pollutant Disposal Facility. Private, Contracted Hauler. o Report: Internal o Examples: Leaking vehicles and dripping dumpsters.  Tier 2 Event: Moderate impact to public safety, infrastructure, and environment. Spills with a major dimension greater than six feet and non-continuous, or spills with a major dimension greater than six feet, continuous, and contained. Outfalls and illicit connections deemed suspect and obvious sources of pollution. Response includes: o Team: MS4 Staff and Code Compliance Officer o Timeline: Initiate response within 24 hours o Resolution: MS4 Operations and/or contracted restoration firm. o Pollutant Disposal: Public, Sediment/Pollutant Disposal Facility. Private, Contracted Hauler. o Report: Internal o Examples: Carpet cleaning process water discharge, sanitary overflow, camper waste disposal, homeless camp cleanup, floor drain, illicit sanitary connections, and non-hazardous chemical spills.  Tier 3 Event: Immediate threat to human health, infrastructure, and environment. Spills with a major dimension greater than 6’, continuous, and not contained. o Team: MS4 Staff, Code Compliance Office, and Emergency Services o Timeline: Immediate o Resolution: Fire, MS4 Operations, and/or contracted restoration firm. o Pollutant Disposal: Public, Sediment/Pollutant Disposal Facility. Private, Contracted Hauler. o Reporting: Internal and MDEQ Notification o Example: Hazardous spills Eliminate discharge through various mitigation measures depending on event severity. Options include:  Absorbent  Vaccum and disposal  Pipe plugs or seals  Decontamination  Enforcement  Infrastructure retrofit If applicable, notify appropriate state and federal agencies. Complete an Event Report 4.4 Enforcement Response Plan Pursuant to §40.04.860 and §40.04.890 BMC, the MS4 has the authority to implement the following Enforcement Response Plan (ERP) and use the following enforcement protocols for violations of BMC, including: 87 SECTION 4.0 – ILLICIT DISCHARGE DETECTION AND ELIMINATION PROGRAM 5 Informal Response: Warning issued via email notification or verbal notice used for cases when the responsible party unknowingly commits a violation of BMC. If not dealt with in an agreed upon timeframe, or an agreement does not occur, the MS4 escalates to a Formal Response. The MS4 handles most Tier 1 events under this category. Formal Response: Notice of Violation and Cease and Desist Order using a set compliance timeline and monetary penalties and/or remediation costs. The MS4 uses this approach in cases when the responsible party knowingly violates BMC or has a record of non-compliance. The MS4 handles most Tier 2 and 3 events under this category. Judicial Response: Civil penalties, injunctive relief, or criminal penalties using the Bozeman Police Department, City Attorney, and Municipal Court. The MS4 uses this approach in cases where the responsible party repeatedly and knowingly commits violations of BMC and fails to remedy issues under a Formal Response. Additional ERP Information:  City staff with enforcement authority: Stormwater Program Technician, Stormwater Program Specialist, Stormwater Program Manager, Stormwater Project Coordinator have the authority to investigate events as an EC; however, the the Stormwater Program Manager is the authorized Enforcement Agent and makes determinations regarding penalties.  MSU Staff with enforcement authority: Project Managers specific to the project, Stormwater Leads, have the authority to investigate events as an EC; however, the Primary Stormwater Lead (Director, Facilities Services) is the authorized Enforcement Agent and makes determinations regarding penalties. 4.5 Event Tracking 2019 Events: 4  Tier 2 Event: Sobo Lofts Fire o Event ID: 201901 o Location: See map 4.5.2 o Pollutant: Ash, construction debris/chemicals, traction sand, and chlorinated water o Local Control: Emergency fire operation and system cleaning o Significant: Yes, 1.5 million gallons of water sprayed on the fire. The majority did not discharge to Mandeville Creek due to a degraded historical irrigation conveyance that ponded the flows until infiltration occurred.  Tier 1 Event: Durston Oil Spill o Event ID: 201902 o Location: See map 4.5.2 o Pollutant: Motor oil o Local Control: BMC Section 40.04.200 o Significant: No, immediate response and mitigation by MS4 Staff.  Tier 2 Event: Bogert Pool Filter Backflush o Event ID: 201903 o Location: See map 4.5.2 o Pollutant: Chlorinated water, Celatom Diatomite Filter Media, and filter debris o Local Control: BMC Section 40.04.200 88 SECTION 4.0 – ILLICIT DISCHARGE DETECTION AND ELIMINATION PROGRAM 6 o Significant: No, immediate response and implementation of operational controls, plugged connection soon after eliminating the chance of future discharges.  Tier 1 Event: Karst Stage Oil Spill o Event ID: 201904 o Location: See map 4.5.2 o Pollutant: Motor oil o Local Control: BMC Section 40.04.200 o Significant: No, immediate response and mitigation by Karst stage staff. 2020 Events: 3  Tier 1 Event: Bogert Pavilion o Event ID: 202001 o Location: See map 4.5.2 o Pollutant: Chlorinated wash-water o Significant: No, implementation of operational controls and plugged the connection eliminating the chance of future discharges.  Tier 1 Event: Vehicle Oil Leak o Event ID: 202002 o Location: See map 4.5.2 o Pollutant: Diesel Fuel o Significant: No, vehicle towed and spill cleaned.  Tier 1 Event: Willson Ave. Paint Spill o Event ID: 202003 o Location: See map 4.5.2 o Pollutant: Paint o Significant: No, immediate response by the Bozeman Fire Department and Streets Division. 2021 Events: 8  Tier 2 Event: Tire-Rama o Event ID: 202101 o Location: See map 4.5.2 o Pollutant: Zep Heavy-Duty Powdered Concrete Cleaner o Significant: No, implementation of operational controls and rapid response by Bozeman Fire Department prevented the spill from entering the storm sewer.  Tier 2 Event: Hot Tub Discharge o Event ID: 202102 o Location: See map 4.5.2 o Pollutant: Chlorinated Water o Significant: Yes, over 5-gallons, confirmed discharge to the storm sewer.  Tier 1 Event: Glenellen Dr. Oil Leak o Event ID: 202103 o Location: See map 4.5.2 89 SECTION 4.0 – ILLICIT DISCHARGE DETECTION AND ELIMINATION PROGRAM 7 o Pollutant: Automotive fluids o Significant: No, no documented discharge to the storm sewer system.  Tier 1 Event: RSVP Motel Mural Painting o Event ID: 202104 o Location: See map 4.5.2 o Pollutant: Paint o Significant: No, less than 5-gallon, confirmed discharged to the storm sewer.  Tier 1 Event: Westridge Rock Washing o Event ID: 202105 o Location: See map 4.5.2 o Pollutant: Sediment o Significant: Yes, over 5-gallons, confirmed discharged to the storm sewer.  Tier 1 Event: Sweet Chili Kitchen Equipment Cleaning o Event ID: 202106 o Location: See map 4.5.2 o Pollutant: Oils & Grease o Significant: Yes, over 5-gallons, confirmed discharged to the storm sewer.  Tier 1 Event: SWWW_00012 Oil Sheen o Event ID: 202107 o Location: See map 4.5.2 o Pollutant: Oils & Grease o Significant: No, source of discharge never confirmed, no environmental impacts.  Tier 1 Event: O’Reilly Auto Parts o Event ID: 202108 o Location: See map 4.5.2 o Pollutant: Oils & Grease o Significant: No, less than 5-gallons, no discharged to SWWW_00034.  Tier 1 Event: Romney Hall Construction Fuel Spill o Event ID: 202109 o Location: See map 4.5.2 o Pollutant: Diesel Fuel o Significant: No, less than 5-gallons, no discharged to the storm sewer. 2022 Events: 4  Tier 1 Event: Oliver St. Diesel Spill o Event ID: 202201 o Location: See map 4.5.2 o Pollutant: Diesel fuel o Significant: No, implementation of operational controls and rapid response by staff and resident prevented the spill from entering the storm sewer.  Tier 2 Event: Yellowstone Pavement Solution 90 SECTION 4.0 – ILLICIT DISCHARGE DETECTION AND ELIMINATION PROGRAM 8 o Event ID: 202202 o Location: See map 4.5.2 o Pollutant: Diesel fuel o Significant: Yes, undetermined amount of diesel fuel discharged to Mathew Bird Creek. Oil sheen documented in Mathew Bird Creek. MDEQ notified.  Tier 1 Event: Tom’s Alignment Center o Event ID: 202203 o Location: See map 4.5.2 o Pollutant: Soaps, oils, greases, metals o Significant: No, implementation of operational controls and rapid response by staff prevented a discharge to Bozeman Creek.  Tier 2 Event: Whistle Pig Korean o Event ID: 202203 o Location: See map 4.5.2 o Pollutant: Used cooking oil o Significant: No, implementation of operational controls and rapid response by staff prevented a discharge to Bozeman Creek. Table 4.5.1: Illicit Discharge Events Event Tier 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2024 Tier 1 4 6 2 3 8 2 - - - - Tier 2 1 1 2 0 1 2 - - - - Tier 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 - - - - Total: 5 7 4 3 9 4 - - - - 91 SECTION 4.0 – ILLICIT DISCHARGE DETECTION AND ELIMINATION PROGRAM 9 4.6 2022 Non-Stormwater Discharge Evaluation The MS4 evaluates the following non-stormwater discharges to identify if they pose a waterway threat: 1. Water Line Flushing Graphic 4.5.2: Event Locations 92 SECTION 4.0 – ILLICIT DISCHARGE DETECTION AND ELIMINATION PROGRAM 10  Description: Chlorinated water resulting from Bac-T testing and cleaning of new water lines  Associated Pollutant(s): Chlorine  Local Control(s): Construction specifications requiring contractors to contain flush water  Risk: Medium, managed as Tier 2 illicit discharge  Illicit Discharges Reported: 0 2. Landscape Irrigation, Irrigation, Lawn Watering, and Potable Water  Description: Intermittent over-watering or faulty sprinklers  Associated Pollutant(s): Varied depending on the source (well, surface water, or potable supply)  Local Control(s): Water Conservation landscaping audits, design standards, and outreach initiatives  Risk: Low, not managed as an illicit discharge  Illicit Discharges Reported: 0 3. Rising Groundwater, Springs, and Flows from Riparian Habitats  Description: Flows that enter the storm sewer system when ground and surface water levels rise above the bottom elevation of the storm drain or conveyance.  Associated Pollutant(s): None  Local Control(s): Prohibition of new sump drains that discharge to a street or other public right-of-way, a sanitary sewer line, or onto neighboring properties  Risk: Low, not managed as an illicit discharge  Illicit Discharges Reported: 0 4. Uncontaminated Groundwater Infiltration  Description: Water other than wastewater that enters a storm sewer system from the ground through such means as defective pipes, pipe joints, connections, or utility holes  Associated Pollutant(s): None  Local Control(s): Inspection of storm sewer pipe annually, and defective pipe repair  Risk: Low, not managed as an illicit discharge  Illicit Discharges Reported: 0 5. Uncontaminated Pumped Groundwater  Description: Groundwater pumped into the storm sewer system for lowering subsurface levels, particularly for construction  Associated Pollutant(s): None  Local Control(s): Discharge must originate from a well located in an undisturbed area, initial turbid first flush contained on site  Risk: Low, not managed as an illicit discharge  Illicit Discharges Reported: 0 6. Foundation Drains, Crawl Space Pumps, and Footing Drains  Description: Groundwater pumped or diverted from building foundations to the MS4.  Associated Pollutant(s): None  Local Control(s): Prohibition of new sump drains that discharge to a street or other public right-of-way, a sanitary sewer line, or onto neighboring properties  Risk: Low, not managed as an illicit discharge  Illicit Discharges Reported: 0 93 SECTION 4.0 – ILLICIT DISCHARGE DETECTION AND ELIMINATION PROGRAM 11 7. Air Conditioning Condensation  Description: HVAC and refrigeration condensation discharged to the MS4  Associated Pollutant(s): None  Local Control(s): Allowed  Risk: Low, not managed as an illicit discharge  Illicit Discharges Reported: 0 8. Swimming Pool and Hot Tub Drain Water  Description: Dumping of swimming pool and hot tub drain water into the MS4  Associated Pollutant(s): Chlorine  Local Control(s): Infiltration, discharge to sanitary sewer, or dechlorination  Risk: Medium, managed as Tier 2 illicit discharge  Illicit Discharges Reported: 1 9. Fire Hydrant Flushing  Description: Discharges resulting from regular fire hydrant flushing by MS4 operators  Associated Pollutant(s): Chlorine  Local Control(s): Water and Sewer Division fire hydrant flushing process and/or dechlorination  Risk: Low, not managed as an illicit discharge  Illicit Discharges Reported: 0 10. Non-Commercial, Individual Residential, and Charity Carwashes  Description: Wash-waters resulting from vehicle washing  Associated Pollutant(s): Soaps, oils, greases, metals, and sediment  Local Control(s): The City requires a public assembly permit for non-commercial and charity car washes on public property. If deemed appropriate, the MS4 can utilize this process to require specific controls.  Risk: Low, not managed as an illicit discharge  Illicit Discharges Reported: 0 11. Street Wash Waters  Description: Water used to wash sidewalks, streets, parking lots, and buildings  Associated Pollutant(s): Sediment, oils, greases, and metals  Local Control(s): Allowed  Risk: Low, not managed as an illicit discharge  Illicit Discharges Reported: 0 4.7 Outfall Reconnaissance Inventory (ORI) The MS4 has hundreds of storm sewer outfalls that discharge into numerous waterways and irrigation ditches within its boundary. Staff uses the Draft 2016 Integrated Report available at the MDEQ’s Clean Water Act Information Center, TMDL, and City GIS databases (250’ buffer with “outfall” terminus type) to compile the following information: 94 SECTION 4.0 – ILLICIT DISCHARGE DETECTION AND ELIMINATION PROGRAM 12 Table 4.7.1: Receiving Waterways # Waterway Name 2019 Outfalls 2020 Outfalls 2021 Outfalls 2022 Outfalls TMDL Impairments MS4 Waste Load Allocation 1 Baxter Creek 18 17 17 17 No None None 2 Bozeman Creek 63 20 19 17 Yes E. Coli, Nitrogen, Sediment, Chlorophyll-a, alteration in streamside cover Sediment: 81 tons/year 3 Bridger Creek 1 0 0 0 Yes Chlorophyll-a and Nitrate/Nitrite (Nitrite + Nitrate as N) None 4 Catron Creek 83 72 67 70 No None None 5 Cattail Creek 44 43 43 44 No None None 6 East Gallatin River 22 10 12 12 Yes Total Nitrogen, Total Phosphorous None 7 Farmers Canal 51 40 22 24 No None None 8 Figgins Creek 22 22 19 20 No None None 9 Flat Creek 11 5 5 7 No None None 10 Mandeville Creek 53 50 33 34 Yes Total Nitrogen, Total Phosphorous None 11 Matthew Bird Creek 31 19 19 19 No None None 12 Maynard- Border Ditch 13 14 13 13 No None None 13 Middle Creek Ditch 25 35 20 22 No None None 14 Mill Ditch 0 0 0 0 No None None 15 Nash Spring Creek 1 2 0 0 No None None 16 Rocky Creek 3 0 0 0 Yes Alteration in Streamside Cover, Anthropogenic Substrate Alterations, Physical Substrate Alterations, Sediment None 17 Story Ditch 10 12 10 10 No None None 18 W. Gallatin Canal 30 32 39 26 No None None 19 Unnamed 153 70 111 131 No None None Totals - - 449 466 - - - 95 SECTION 4.0 – ILLICIT DISCHARGE DETECTION AND ELIMINATION PROGRAM 13 The MS4 prioritizes and inspect outfalls once during each MS4 Permit term using the Center for Watershed Protection protocol, including: Graphic 4.7.2: Stormwater outfall map 96 SECTION 4.0 – ILLICIT DISCHARGE DETECTION AND ELIMINATION PROGRAM 14  Outfall Inventory: Desktop analysis to update existing and add new outfalls to the MS4’s databases. Coordination occurs between the Stormwater and Strategic Services Divisions.  Field Preparation: Staff utilizes waders, high visibility vest, measuring tape, multi-parameter sensor (temp and pH), ammonia test strips, turbidimeter, sample bottles, field forms, clipboard, camera, flashlight, legal pad, marker, pen, outfall maps, and nitrile gloves.  Develop Inspection Plan: The MS4 has five maintenance districts that contain approximately 20% of the MS4’s outfalls. Staff inspects one maintenance district per year, or all within a five- year permit cycle. Planning includes using GIS software to identify clusters of outfalls, property ownership, safety concerns, and accessibility to plan inspection routes.  ORI Inspection: The MS4 visits individual outfalls and completes the following workflow: Graphic 4.7.3: ORI Inspection Plan  If applicable, implement Corrective Action Plan: The MS4 initiates a response as defined in SWMP Section 4.3 for any outfall classified as potential, suspect, or obvious pollution source.  Outfall Attribute Update: Staff collects and updates the following outfall spatial attribute information: o Ownership: City of Bozeman, MSU, MDT, Private, or Bozeman School District o Pipe Diameter o Pipe Material o Flow: No, Trickle, Moderate, or Substantial 97 SECTION 4.0 – ILLICIT DISCHARGE DETECTION AND ELIMINATION PROGRAM 15 o Discharge Type: Direct or Indirect o Inspection Date o Terminus Type: Outfall, Pipe End, Sump Pump, Unknown, or Other o Outfall Characterization/Determination: Unlikely, Potential, Suspect, or Obvious The MS4 inspects outfalls deemed a high-priority annually. The MS4 considers an outfall to be high- priority if it meets the following criteria:  18” or more in diameter.  Drains an urban watershed area of 25 acres or more.  Dumps stormwater directly into an impaired receiving water (i.e., no stormwater basin).  Obvious or suspect outfalls classified through previous years’ ORI. High-priority outfalls include: Outfall ID: OF.G08.00035  Discharge Location: Overbrook Dr. and Langhor Ave.  Receiving Waterway: Figgins Creek  Size and Material: 30” RCP Table 4.7.4: OF.G08.00035 Inspection Year Date Flow Characterization 2019 February 1, 2019 Yes, Trickle Unlikely, No Indicators 2020 October 7, 2020 Yes, Trickle Unlikely, No Indicators 2021 October 6, 2021 Yes, Trickle Unlikely, No Indicators 2022 August 13, 2022 Yes, Trickle Unlikely, One Indicator Outfall ID: OF.F06.00090  Discharge Location: S. Bozeman Ave. and E. Cleveland St.  Receiving Waterway: Matthew Bird Creek  Size and Material: 20” Steel Table 4.7.5: OF.F06.00090 Inspection Year Date Flow Characterization 2019 July 19, 2019 No Unlikely, No Indicators 2020 July 7, 2020 No Unlikely, No Indicators 2021 September 2, 2021 No Unlikely, No Indicators 2022 July 20, 2022 No Unlikely, No Indicators Outfall ID: OF.F06.00089  Discharge Location: S. Black Ave. and W. Cleveland St.  Receiving Waterway: Matthew Bird Creek  Size and Material: 19” RCP Table 4.7.6: OF.F06.00089 Inspection Year Date Flow Characterization 2019 July 19, 2019 No Unlikely, No Indicators 2020 July 7, 2020 No Unlikely, No Indicators 2021 September 2, 2021 No Unlikely, No Indicators 2022 July 20, 2022 No Unlikely, No Indicators Outfall ID: OF.H05.00370 98 SECTION 4.0 – ILLICIT DISCHARGE DETECTION AND ELIMINATION PROGRAM 16  Discharge Location: N. 11th Ave. and W. College St.  Receiving Waterway: Mandeville Creek  Size and Material: 18” RCP Table 4.7.7: OF.H05.00370 Inspection Year Date Flow Characterization 2019 July 19, 2019 Yes, Moderate Unlikely, No Indicators 2020 July 7, 2020 No Unlikely, No Indicators 2021 September 8, 2021 Yes, Substantial Unlikely, No Indicators 2022 November 21, 2022 Yes, Substantial Unlikely, No Indicators Outfall ID: OF.H05.00384  Discharge Location: N. 11th Ave. and W. Koch St.  Receiving Waterway: Mandeville Creek  Size and Material: 12” RCP Table 4.7.8: OF.H05.00384 Inspection Year Date Flow Characterization 2019 January 31, 2019 No Unlikely, No Indicators 2020 July 8, 2020 No Unlikely, No Indicators 2021 September 8, 2021 No Unlikely, No Indicators 2022 November 21, 2022 No Unlikely, No Indicators Outfall ID: OF.F04.00441  Discharge Location: N. Rouse Ave. and E. Villard St.  Receiving Waterway: Bozeman Creek  Size and Material: 42” RCP (42” CMP replaced during Rouse Reconstruction in 2020) Table 4.7.9: OF.F04.00441 Inspection Year Date Flow Characterization 2019 August 8, 2019 No Unlikely, No Indicators 2020 July 7, 2020 No Unlikely, No Indicators 2021 September 2, 2021 No Unlikely, No Indicators 2022 June 24, 2022 No Unlikely, No Indicators Outfall ID: OF.G04.00398  Discharge Location: N. 9th Ave. and W. Villard St.  Receiving Waterway: Tributary SWWW_00053  Size and Material: 24” RCP Table 4.7.10: OF.G04.00398 Inspection Year Date Flow Characterization 2019 January 19, 2019 No Unlikely, No Indicators 2020 July 8, 2020 No Unlikely, One Indicator 2021 September 2, 2021 No Unlikely, No Indicators 2022 August 3, 2022 No Unlikely, No Indicators Outfall ID: OF.F03.00446  Discharge Location: N. Rouse Ave. and E. Peach St.  Receiving Waterway: Bozeman Creek  Size and Material: 43” RCP (Pipe upgraded from 27” RCP during Rouse Reconstruction) 99 SECTION 4.0 – ILLICIT DISCHARGE DETECTION AND ELIMINATION PROGRAM 17 Table 4.7.11: OF.F03.00446 Inspection Year Date Flow Characterization 2019 January 31, 2019 No Unlikely, No Indicators 2020 July 7, 2020 No Unlikely, No Indicators 2021 September 2, 2021 Yes, Moderate Unlikely, No Indicators 2022 August 3, 2022 Yes, Moderate Unlikely, No Indicators Outfall ID: OF.G03.00399  Discharge Location: N. 4th Ave. and W. Peach St.  Receiving Waterway: Tributary SWWW_00034  Size and Material: 30” RCP  Note: Outfall removed in 2020 because of BMX Bike Park project. New outfall location is the jurisdictional boundary of SWWW_00034 (Manley Ditch) and the Cherry Creek Fishing Access. Table 4.7.12: OF.G03.00399 Inspection Year Date Flow Characterization 2019 January 31, 2019 No Potential, Two+ Indicators 2020 - - - 2021 - - - Outfall ID: OF.E03.00450  Discharge Location: N. Rouse Ave. and E. Tamarack St.  Receiving Waterway: Bozeman Creek  Size and Material: 36” RCP Table 4.7.13: OF.G03.00450 Inspection Year Date Flow Characterization 2019 January 31, 2019 No Unlikely, No Indicators 2020 July 7, 2020 No Unlikely, One Indicator 2021 September 2, 2021 No Unlikely, One Indicator 2022 August 3, 2022 No Unlikely, One Indicator Outfall ID: OF.E03.00454  Discharge Location: N. Rouse Ave. and E. Tamarack St.  Receiving Waterway: Bozeman Creek  Size and Material: 30” RCP Table 4.7.14: OF.E03.00454 Inspection Year Date Flow Characterization 2019 January 31, 2019 No Unlikely, No Indicators 2020 July 7, 2020 No Unlikely, No Indicators 2021 September 2, 2021 No Unlikely, No Indicators 2022 August 3, 2022 No Unlikely, No Indicators 100 SECTION 4.0 – ILLICIT DISCHARGE DETECTION AND ELIMINATION PROGRAM 18 The MS4 completed the following outfall inspections: Table 4.7.15: Outfall Inspection Summary ORI Year Outfalls Outfalls Inspected High-Priority Outfalls High-Priority Outfalls Inspected 2019 634 108 Flow: 99 No, 1 Trickle, 6 Moderate, 2 Unknown Pollution Charecterization: 104 Unlikely, 1 Potential, 1 Suspect, 2 Unknown 11 11 Flow: 9 No, 1 Trickle, 1 Moderate Pollution Charecterization: 10 Unlikley, 1 Potential 2020 463 113 Flow: 104 No, 6 Trickle, 3 Moderate Pollution Charecterization: 113 Unlikely 10 10 Flow: 8 No, 2 Trickle Pollution Charecterization: 10 Unlikley 2021 463 329 Flow: 287 No, 15 Trickle, 10 Moderate, 2 Substantial, 2 Unkown. Pollution Characterization: 319 Unlikely 10 10 Flow: 7 No, 1 Trickle, 1 Moderate, 1 Substantial Pollution Characterization: 10 Unlikley 2022 466 180 Flow: 167 No, 8 Trickle, 4 Moderate, 1 Substantial. Pollution Characterization: 180 Unlikely. 10 10 Flow: 7 No, 1 Trickle, 1 Moderate, 1 Substantial Pollution Characterization: 10 Unlikely 101 SECTION 4.0 – ILLICIT DISCHARGE DETECTION AND ELIMINATION PROGRAM 19 Graphic 4.7.16: High Priority Outfalls 102 SECTION 4.0 – ILLICIT DISCHARGE DETECTION AND ELIMINATION PROGRAM 20 4.8 Storm Sewer Infrastructure Viewer The MS4 collects and continually updates its storm sewer infrastructure map. When inaccuracies are found on the MS4’s Infrastructure Viewer or observed in the field, Staff documents, field verifies, and then sends to the GIS Department for correction. The public can view the MS4’s storm sewer system at: https://gisweb.bozeman.net/Html5Viewer/?viewer=infrastructure. 103 SECTION 4.0 – ILLICIT DISCHARGE DETECTION AND ELIMINATION PROGRAM 21 Blank Page 104 Section 5.0 Construction Site Management Program Graphic 5.0.2: Inlet sump clogged with construction debris Graphic 5.0.1: Recently constructed and stabilized stormwater pond 105 SECTION 5.0 - CONSTRUCTION SITE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2 Blank Page 106 SECTION 5.0 - CONSTRUCTION SITE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 3 5.1 Introduction The MS4 strives to improve waterway health, protect public safety, and comply with its MS4 Permit through the regulation of construction sites by: Providing educational opportunities; Administering a permitting program; Conducting site inspections; and Enforcing municipal and state regulations. SWMP Section 5.0 details the following components necessary to administer the MS4’s Construction Site Management Program, including:  Regulatory Framework (5.2)  Construction Site Permitting Program (5.3)  Construction Site Enforcement Response Plan (5.4)  Construction Site Inventory (5.5)  Performance Tracking (5.6)  Program Documents (5.7) 5.2 Regulatory Framework Pursuant to §40.04.350 Bozeman Municipal Code (BMC), the MS4 requires owners/operators of construction sites to comply with the following regulations: Article 4 Chapter 40 Bozeman Municipal Code (BMC); 75-5-101 Montana Code Annotated (MCA); and 17.30.1101, 17.30.1301 et seq., and 17.30.601 et seq. Administratve Rules of Montana (ARM). 5.3 Construction Site Permitting Program Pursuant to §40.04.350 BMC, the MS4 requires owners/operators of construction sites to submit Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPPs) before receiving a Building Permit or Infrastructure Project Notice to Proceed. Three permit application types exist, including: MDEQ General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activity (Construction General Permit): The MS4 requires owners/operators to submit a permit for construction sites that meet the Eligibility Requirments of the most current Construction General Permit. The MS4 completes one permit review for compliance with the most current Construction General Permit. The MS4 provides the owner/operator a Permit Review Checklist and Review Confirmation Letter. The MS4 does not confirm the owner/operator has corrected deficiencies through multiple reviews. Instead, the MS4 reviews for compliance onsite during Compliance Evaluation Inspections (CEI). Construction Stormwater Permit: Sites Less than One (1) Acre: The MS4 requires owners/operators to submit for construction sites with land disturbance less than one acre and greater than 10,000 square feet. The MS4 completes numerous completeness and adequacy reviews of the owner/operator’s application and map, and provides a Review Confirmation Letter once deemed compliant with BMC. Construction Stormwater Permit: Single-Family Residential Projects: The MS4 requires this permit for individual single-family and multi-family construction sites which disturb less than 10,000 square feet. The MS4 completes numerous completeness and adequacy reviews of the 107 SECTION 5.0 - CONSTRUCTION SITE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 4 owner/operator’s application and provides a Review Confirmation Letter once deemed compliant with BMC. 5.4 Enforcement Response Plan The MS4 implements the following Construction Site Enforcement Response Plan (ERP) to ensure compliant construction sites within its jurisdiction: Image 5.4.1: ERP workflow Inspection Type: Pursuant to §40.04.850.D BMC, the MS4 has the authority to complete CEIs at construction sites to ensure compliance with BMC and the Construction General Permit. Inspections may include: (1) Document review, including the site's NOI, SWPPP, BMP 108 SECTION 5.0 - CONSTRUCTION SITE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 5 specifications, site maps, self-inspection records, and (2) Site tour identifying pollutant sources, inspection of implemented BMPs, and compliance determinations with the BMC and Construction General Permit. Inspection types include:  Unannounced: CEI resulting from a complaint or field observation. See SWMP Section 5.4.2.  Announced: CEI resulting from reoccurring inspection efforts, which the MS4 prioritizes based on site prioritization and complaints. See SWMP Section 5.4.2. Compliance Determination: Pursuant to §40.04.860 BMC, the MS4 has the authority to make BMC and Construction General Permit non-compliance determinations, including:  Permit and/or Site is Complaint: No permit nor site non-compliance determinations issued. Inspection closed.  Permit and/or Site is Not Complaint: Permit and/or site non-compliance determinations issued. See SWMP Section 5.4.3. Enforcement Response: The MS4’s enforcement response options, including:  Verbal Warning: An informal response used when the MS4 determines the BMC and Construction General Permit non-compliance determinations are low-risk, and there are reasonable grounds that the owner/operator will correct the issues. Verbal warnings take the form of phone calls, emails, or in-person meetings. Inspection closed.  Site Inspection Form: An informal response by the MS4 to document BMC and Construction General Permit non-compliance determinations. The MS4 emails or delivers the Site Inspection Form to the site owner/operator. See SWMP Section 5.4.4. Enforcement Action: Pursuant to §40.04.860 and §40.04.890 BMC, the MS4 has the authority to require the owner/operator to comply with BMC and/or the Construction General Permit using the following actions:  Follow-Up CEI: An informal action completed to ensure the site owner/operator corrects the non-compliance determinations issued in the Site Inspection Form. A Follow-Up CEI can take the form of a site visit, a conversation, or a review of submitted information. If so, inspection closed. If not, See SWMP Section 5.4.4 – Notice of Violations.  Notice of Violations (NOV): A formal enforcement action taken when the site owner/operator does not resolve the non-compliance determinations. An NOV includes written violations of the BMC and the Construction General Permit, a Cease and Desist Order, and Stop Work Order. Both Orders apply to the site activities resulting in the issued violations and associated non-compliance determinations. NOVs require the site owner/operator to submit a written response within a set timeframe, documenting that they have resolved the violations and associated non-compliance determinations. Upon the MS4’s review and approval of the written response, the inspection is closed. If existing non- compliance determinations remain or additional areas of non-complaince are identified, see SWMP Section 5.4.4 - Enforcement. In severe cases, the MS4 bypasses the Follow-Up CEI and immediately issues an NOV.  Enforcement: A variety of formal enforcement penalties used by the MS4 when the site owner/operator does not comply with the NOV’s requirements, including: o Building Permit Stop Work Order: Pursuant to §10.02.010.D, BMC, a Building Official may issue an order requiring any site owner/operator to immediately stop all work of any kind related to site’s Building Permit. Any person who continues work after having been served with a Stop Work Order, except such work as that person is directed by the 109 SECTION 5.0 - CONSTRUCTION SITE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 6 City to perform to remove a violation or unsafe condition, shall be subject to the misdemeanor penalty provision of §10.02.100 BMC. The issuance of a Stop Work Order cancels any pending inspections. o Withholding Issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy: Pursuant to §10.02.010.C, BMC, a Building Official of the City may withhold the issuance of a certificate of occupancy when the available evidence shows the structure and associated development does not conform with the standards of Chapter 40 BMC, a permit issued pursuant to Chapter 40 BMC, or has failed to pay costs of the abatement of stormwater violations as may be ordered by the City. o Misdemeanor Criminal Charge and Prosecution (Judicial): Pursuant to §40.04.910 BMC, any person, firm or corporation, their agents or servants who violate any provision or requirement of Chapter 40 BMC or of a permit issued shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by a fine not exceeding $500.00 and in addition shall pay all costs and expenses of the case. A separate offense shall be deemed committed upon each day during or on which a violation occurs or continues. Additional ERP Information:  Elimination and Abatement of Illegal Construction Discharges: The MS4 uses the ERP to identify and resolve violations of BMC and/or the Construction General Permit.  Staff with Enforcement Authority: Stormwater Program Technician, Stormwater Program Specialist, Stormwater Program Project Coordinator, Stormwater Program Manager have the authority to issue non-compliance determinations. The Stormwater Manager is the authorized Enforcement Agent and makes determinations regarding enforcement penalties.  Enforcement Action Available, Escalation Process, and Schedule: The MS4’s ERP is flexible and includes escalation protocols based on a owner/operator’s response, while also providing options for immediate action when the Enforcement Agent identifies severe violations of BMC and/or the Construction General Permit. The MS4's ERP schedule is based on the Enforcement Agent's determination of risk (weather, capacity, waterway proximity, site size, pollutant source scale and severity, owner/operator compliance history, etc.). ERP implementation ranges from immediate action to a timeframe extending a week or more. A typical Follow-Up CEI occurs within five days. An NOV standard response timeframe is 10 days.  Abate Damages and Prevent Reoccurences: Upon the conclusion of the NOV via the Closure Letter issuance, the MS4 maintains the authority to enact immediate enforcement action, as detailed in SWMP Section 5.4.4 - Enforcement upon the identification of any repeat violations. Site Prioritization and Inspection Frequency Protocol: The MS4 uses the following Construction Site Scoring Matrix to determine a site’s priority level. Table 5.4.2: Construction Site Scoring Matrix Criteria 3-Points 2-Points 1-Point Site Size (Acres) > 10-Acres 5 - 10 Acres < 5-Acre Proximity to Waterbody < 1,000 ft > 1,000 or < 2,000 ft > 2,000 ft Site Steepness per SWPPP Yes - No Bozeman Creek Watershed Yes - No Permit Review Checklist Score > 50 25 - 50 < 25 Once priority is determined, the MS4 completes inspections per the frequencies outlined below. 110 SECTION 5.0 - CONSTRUCTION SITE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 7  High-Priority Construction Sites (Over 10 Points): o Once at construction commencment. o After every .25” rain event. The MS4 interprets this standard to mean any continuous rain event that occurs within a 24-hour timeframe and uses the Bozeman International Airport NOAA Rain Gage. o After every snow melt event resulting in visible erosion. o Once at the conclusion of the project.  Medium-Priority Construction Sites (5 - 10 Points): o As needed basis per complaints and field observations.  Low-Priority Construction Sites (Below 5 Points): o As needed basis per complaints and field observations. o Less than One Acre Construction Sites. o Single-Family Residential Construction Sites. 5.5 Construction Site Inventory The following tables contain an inventory of construction site permits and inspection: Table 5.5.1: Permit Type Inventory Permit Type 2019 2020 2021 2022 City Single-Family Residential Total 292 272 185 161 City Less than One Acre Total 63 34 30 29 City Greater than One Acre Total 29 36 30 35 MSU Greater than One Acre Total 1 1 1 Table 5.5.2: Inpsection Type Inventory * Totals represent new permits/year and do not include return visits or final occupancy inspections. High-priority inspections count as one inspection. Inspection Type 2019 2020 2021 2022 City Single-Family Residential Total 19 1 9 10 City Single-Family Residential Percentage (%) 7% .4% 9% 6% City Less than One Acre Total 16 5 0 3 City Less than One Acre Percentage (%) 25% 14% 0% 10% City Greater than One Acre Total 6 15 9 27 City Greater than One Acre Percentage (%) 21% 42% 30% 77% MSU Greater than One Acre Total 3 2 5 MSU Greater than One Acre Percentage (%) >100% >100% >100% High-Priority Construction Sites: OAC19-0001 16 Willson Residential Development: One acre site within the Bozeman Creek watershed. The site includes the demolition of exisitng structures and construction of numerous row houses.  Permit Confirmation: January 8, 2019  Initial Inspection: n/a  Precipitation Triggered Inspections: o Inspection 1: May 28, 2019 o Inspection 2: June 10, 2019 111 SECTION 5.0 - CONSTRUCTION SITE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 8 o Inspection 3: June 21, 2019 o Inspection 4: July 9, 2019 o Inspection 5: July 16, 2019 o Inspection 6: September 9, 2019 o Inspection 7: September 23, 2019 o Inspection 8: June 8, 2020 o Inspection 9: June 16-17, 2020 o Inspection 10: July 23, 2020 o Inspection 11: September 7, 2020 o Inspection 12: April 26, 2021 o Inspection 13: May 10, 2021 o Inspection 14: May 27, 2021 o Inspection 15: August 9, 2021 o Inspection 16: August 20, 2021 o Inspection 17: October 9, 2021 o Inspection 18: April 22, 2022 o Inspection 19: June 1, 2022 o Inspection 20: June 21, 2022  Final Inspection: June 29, 2022 OAC19-0026 Bozeman Public Safety Center: Eight acre site within the Bozeman Creek watershed. The site includes the demolition of existing structures and construction of commercial building.  Permit Confirmation: August 27, 2019  Initial Inspection: n/a  Precipitation Triggered Inspections: o Inspection 1: August 27, 2019 o Inspection 2: September 23, 2019 o Inspection 3: January 8, 2020 o Inspection 4: June 8, 2020 o Inspection 5: June 16-17, 2020 o Inspection 6: July 23, 2020 o Inspection 7: September 7, 2020 o Inspection 8: April 26, 2021 o Inspection 9: May 10, 2021 o Inspection 10: May 27, 2021 o Inspection 11: August 9, 2021 o Inspection 12: August 20, 2021 o Inspection 13: October 9, 2021 o Inspection 14: October 26, 2021 o Inspection 15: April 25, 2022 o Inspection 16: May 3, 2022 o Inspection 17: May 9, 2022 o Inspection 18: May 12, 2022 o Inspection 19: May 17, 2022 o Inspection 20: June 1, 2022 o Inspection 21: June 22, 2022 112 SECTION 5.0 - CONSTRUCTION SITE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 9 o Inspection 22: July 7, 2022 o Inspection 23: July 23, 2022  Final Inspection: August 25, 2022 OAC20-0017 Front Street Interceptor Project: Three acre site within the Bozeman Creek watershed. The site includes the installation of a trunk sewer line.  Permit Confirmation: August 12, 2020  Initial Inspection: August 8, 2020  Precipitation Triggered Inspections: o Inspection 1: September 7, 2020 o Inspection 2: April 26, 2021 o Inspection 3: May 10, 2021 o Inspection 4: May 27, 2021 o Inspection 5: August 9, 2021 o Inspection 6: August 20, 2021 o Inspection 6: October 9, 2021 o Inspection 6: October 26, 2021  Final Inspection: Not conducted OAC20-0042 Allision Subdivision: Forty-eight acre site within the Bozeman Creek watershed. The site includes the installation of a subdivision, including utilities, roads, and structures.  Points: 12  Permit Confirmation: December 17, 2020  Initial Inspection: January 12, 2021  Precipitation Triggered Inspections: o Inspection 1: March 19, 2021 o Inspection 2: April 26, 2021 o Inspection 3: May 10, 2021 o Inspection 4: May 27, 2021 o Inspection 5: June 10, 2021 o Inspection 6: May 10, 2021 o Inspection 7: August 9, 2021 o Inspection 8: October 9, 2021 o Inspection 9: October 26, 2021 o Inspection 10: April 20, 2022 o Inspection 11: May 19, 2022 o Inspection 12: May 31, 2022 o Inspection 13: June 21: 2022 o Inspection 14: September 19, 2022 o Inspection 15: October 25, 2022  Final Inspection: TBD OAC21-021 Blackwood Groves: Twenty seven acre site within the Bozeman Creek watershed. The site includes the installation of a subdivision, including utilities, roads, and structures.  Points: 12  Permit Confirmation: July 20, 2021 113 SECTION 5.0 - CONSTRUCTION SITE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 10  Initial Inspection: August 9, 2021  Precipitation Triggered Inspections: o Inspection 1: August 24, 2021 o Inspection 2: October 9, 2021 o Inspection 3: October 26, 2021 o Inspection 4: April 25, 2022 o Inspection 5: June 21, 2022 o Inspection 6: July 4, 2022 o Inspection 7: September 19, 2022 o Inspection 8: October 25, 2022  Final Inspection: TBD OAC21-035 North Park Development: Fifteen acre site within the Mandeville Creek watershed. The site includes the installation of a subdivision, including utilities, roads, and structures.  Points: 11  Permit Confirmation: December 20, 2021  Initial Inspection: May 19, 2021  Precipitation Triggered Inspections: o Inspection 1: May 31, 2022 o Inspection 2: June 21, 2022 o Inspection 3: July 7, 2022 o Inspection 4: September 20, 2022 o Inspection 5: September 26, 2022 o Inspection 6: October 25, 2022  Final Inspection: TBD OAC22-015 North Park – MRL Right of Way: Thirty six acre site within the Mandeville Creek watershed. The site includes the installation of a new railroad track infrastructure.  Points: 11  Permit Confirmation: May 18, 2022  Initial Inspection: June 23, 2022  Precipitation Triggered Inspections: o Inspection 1: July 7, 2022 o Inspection 2: June 21, 2022 o Inspection 3: September 20, 2022 o Inspection 4: September 26, 2022 o Inspection 5: October 26, 2022  Final Inspection: TBD 5.6 Performance Tracking The MS4 completes a Construction Site Compliance Audit in the fall, evaluating 50 random construction sites to determine their compliance with the BMC and Construction General Permit. The MS4 evaluates each construction site using the following criteria: 114 SECTION 5.0 - CONSTRUCTION SITE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 11 Implementation: BMPs present or absent. Adequacy: Appropriate type and scale of BMPs for site conditions. Installation: Adequate BMP installation per industry standard specifications. Maintenance: Sufficient maintenance so that BMPs are in good working order. After evaluation, the MS4 grades each construction site using one of the following categories: 0-Points: Not compliant with permit, high risk to infrastructure, public, and environment 1-Point: Partially compliant with permit, moderate risk to infrastructure, public, and environment 2-Points: Compliant with permit, low risk to infrastructure, public, and environment The MS4 compiles the collected data and updates the following: Table 5.6.1: Construction Site Compliance Audit Scores Audit Year Audit Dates Compliance Trend Total Points Earned Score OAC Average UAC Average SFR Average 2018 October 24 - 26 n/a 33/100 33% 33% 37% 31% 2019 October 14 - 16 Decreasing 28/100 28% 28% 29% 28% 2020 November 6 - 13 Increasing 34/100 34% 67% 21% 27% 2021 November 19 – 22 Increasing 37/100 38% 65% 50% 24% 2022 October 4, 5, 13, 12 Increasing 69/100 69% 60% 73% 71% 2018 Discussion:  Increased BMP use but many not adequately maintained.  Noncompliance was mostly contained within private sites.  Increased inspection frequency is effective at increasing compliance rates. 2019 Discussion:  Compliance degrades back to pre-inspection levels after inspections.  Permit applicant does not always communicate the requirements to onsite workers.  64% of commercial and infrastructure sites yielded a score with moderate or low risk.  44% of residential sites yielded a score with moderate or low risk.  Only three sites fully complied with regulations.  Increase inspection frequency to ensure compliance throughout project life.  Inspect sites proportional to ratios (i.e. residential/commercial/infrastructure).  Apply more emphasis on installation, maintenance, and records during inspections. 2020 Discussion:  Multiple SWPPP reviews for a respective project do not result in elevated onsite compliance.  Inspection time and constant presence equates to improved compliance onsite.  The City’s consulting engineer should create SWPPPs for public projects, not the contractor.  More emphasis required on installation, maintenance, and records during inspections. 2021 Discussion:  Single review for a respective OAC permit did not result in a decrease of onsite compliance.  Recently inspected sites had higher instances of onsite compliance.  OAC site inspection emphasis resulted in a similar compliance score from the previous year.  Low SFR inspection rate resulted in similar compliance score from previous year. 2022 Discussion: 115 SECTION 5.0 - CONSTRUCTION SITE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 12  All three permit types showed large increases in compliance scores.  Increased inspection rates results in increased compliance scores.  OAC site inspection emphasis resulted in a higher compliance score from the previous year. 5.7 Program Documents Single-Family Residential Sites:  Construction Stormwater Permit: Single-Family Residential Projects  SFR Permit Review Checklist  Construction Stormwater Permit Confirmation  SFR and UAC Site Inspection Form  Notice of Violations/Cease and Desist Order  Stop Work Order Less than One Acre Sites:  Construction Stormwater Permit: Sites Less than One Acre  UAC Permit Review Checklist  Construction Stormwater Permit Confirmation  SFR and UAC Site Inspection Form  Notice of Violations/Cease and Desist Order  Stop Work Order Greater than One Acre Sites:  MDEQ Construction General Permit  MDEQ Construction General Permit Notice of Intent (NOI)  MDEQ Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)  MDEQ Construction Stormwater Permit Notice of Termination  MDEQ Construction Stormwater Permit Transfer Notification 33%28% 34%37% 69% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022% Compliance/Earned ScoreCalendar Year Construction Site Compliance Audit Scores Average SFR UAC OAC Graphic 5.6.2: Construction Compliance Audit Scores 116 SECTION 5.0 - CONSTRUCTION SITE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 13  OAC Permit Review Checklist  OAC Site Inspection Form  Notice of Violations/Cease and Desist Order  Stop Work Order 117 SECTION 5.0 - CONSTRUCTION SITE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 14 Blank Page 118 Section 6.0 Post-Construction Program Image 6.0.2 Stormwater basin restoration Image 6.0.1 Overgrown stormwater basin 119 SECTION 6.0 - POST-CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM 2 Blank Page 120 SECTION 6.0 - POST-CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM 3 6.1 Introduction The MS4 strives to improve waterway health, protect public safety, and comply with its MS4 Permit through the regulation and oversight of existing and new structural Best Management Practices (BMP) in the following ways: Enforcement of water quality and flood control standards on new and redevelopment projects; Inspections of structural BMPs SWMP Section 6.0 details the components necessary to administer the MS4’s Post-Construction Management Program, including:  Regulatory Framework and Applicable Documents (6.2)  Development Review (6.3)  Structural BMP Inventory (6.4)  Inspection Program (6.5)  High-Priority Structural BMPs (6.6)  Enforcement Response Plan (6.7)  Performance Tracking (6.8)  Ongoing and Future Initiatives (6.9) 6.2 Regulatory Framework and Applicable Documents Runoff generated from the first half-inch of rainfall (first flush) contains the majority of pollutants deposited on impervious areas during dry periods. Structural BMPs mitigate pollutants from entering waterways by capturing the first flush. Using BMPs, the MS4 requires new and redevelopment projects over one acre to capture the first half-inch of rainfall. Developers must implement structural BMPs, which can include surface detention and retention facilities, permeable pavers, and underground infiltration facilities. In Bozeman, structural BMPs must also be designed to limit runoff to the predevelopment level during a 10-year, 2-hour storm. This reduces peak runoff and helps protect waterways, property and human health. The MS4 also requires developers to implement non-structural BMPs that promote waterway health, including zoning and land planning, wetland regulations, waterway setbacks, and open space standards. Various governing documents contain standards, policies and regulations related to structural and non- structural BMPs for new and redevelopment, including:  City of Bozeman Design Standards and Specification Policy - 2020  City of Bozeman Modifications to Montana Public Works Standard Specifications - 6th Edition  Montana Public Works Standard Specifications - 6th Edition  Bozeman Municipal Code  Montana Post-Construction Storm Water BMP Design Guidance Manual - 2017  City of Bozeman Stormwater Facilities Plan - 2008 6.3 Development Review The MS4 completes development reviews related to structural BMPs as developers submit new and redevelopment project proposals. Projects triggering the regulatory threshold covered in SWMP Section 6.2 include commercial, multi-family, and subdivision developments. In most cases, developers utilize structural BMPs through an onsite management approach, which the MS4 defines at the parcel or 121 SECTION 6.0 - POST-CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM 4 subdivision scale. The onsite management approach's primary benefits are the decentralized siting of structural BMPs, promotion of green space, and better integration of structural BMPs into the landscape. The disadvantage of this approach is the challenges of tracking the increasing number of structural BMPs throughout the MS4 as well as assigning financial responsibility for long-term maintenance responsibilities. An alternative to the onsite management approach is the use of an offsite management approach such as regional treatment facilities. This approach results in structural BMPs located at the bottom of watersheds that contain numerous subdivisions. This approach's primary benefit is the reduction of individual BMPs and instead focuses on the efficiency of inspecting and maintaining fewer regional facilities. The disadvantages of this approach are that it requires significant planning, upfront MS4 investment, and an extensive payback financing mechanism. The MS4 does not utilize an offsite management approach; however, is exploring future opportunities. Graphic 6.3.1 provides a conceptual view of the varying management approaches. The following information and Chart 6.3.2 describe the MS4’s typical structural BMP review process: The developer selects a structural BMP based on site conditions, completes a design, and submits documents for review which includes drawings, drainage reports, and a maintenance plan. Graphic 6.3.1: Onsite and Offsite Management Approach Comparison 122 SECTION 6.0 - POST-CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM 5 The Engineering Division reviews the documents, ensures compliance with standards and policies, and provides written comments to the developer. This step repeats as necessary until the proposed design fully complies with design requirements. The Stormwater Division offers review support, primarily focusing on the maintenance-related aspects of the structural BMP. The developer constructs the project and associated structural BMPs after receiving City approval. In some cases, modifications may occur at this stage in response to unforeseen site conditions. Once complete, the Engineering and Stormwater Divisions complete an inspection to verify the developer installed the BMP as approved. In addition, the Stormwater Division provides a secondary inspection focused on stabilization. Results from the Stormwater Division’s inspection are stored in the Site Inspection Form and shared with the developer. This step can repeat numerous times until the constructed BMP fully complies with the approved documents and Bozeman Municipal Code. The Stormwater Division confirms that the geographic information system (GIS) database contains the structural BMP. The BMP goes into service and is indefinitely managed by the owner. 6.4 Structural BMP Inventory The MS4 maintains an inventory of structural BMPs as development progresses. The process typically includes a combination of GIS map digitization and field verification. Tables 6.4.1 – 6.4.5 breakdown the structural stormwater BMPs based on four ownership categories, including: Public: Contains structural BMPs located on public land, including the City and MSU. Private: Contains structural BMPs located on private property. Open Space/Parkland: Contains structural BMPs located on homeowner association (HOA) open space or parkland. Graphic 6.3.2: Development Review Flow Chart 123 SECTION 6.0 - POST-CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM 6 Unknown: Contains structural BMPs without known ownership. Graphic 6.4.1: Post-Construction Facility Inventory Map 124 SECTION 6.0 - POST-CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM 7 The MS4 also categorizes and tracks the type of structural BMPs: Surface Detention Facility: Regulated discharge to receiving waterway via an outlet structure Underground Detention Facility: Regulated discharge to waterway via an outlet structure Surface Retention Facility: No discharge to a waterway Underground Retention Facility: No discharge to a waterway The MS4 updates the inventory annually, with variations occurring as ownership determinations arise. Table 6.4.1 Public Structural BMPs Type 2020 2021 2022 Surface Detention Facility 26 38 45 Underground Detention Facility 2 3 3 Surface Retention Facility 12 19 39 Underground Retention Facility 1 10 10 Total: 41 70 97 Table 6.4.2 Private Structural BMPs Type 2020 2021 2022 Surface Detention Facility 133 142 190 Underground Detention Facility 12 18 26 Surface Retention Facility 137 211 304 Underground Retention Facility 40 74 91 Total: 322 445 611 Table 6.4.3 Home/Property Owners Association Type 2020 2021 2022 Surface Detention Facility 247 253 251 Underground Detention Facility 32 32 32 Surface Retention Facility 88 121 129 Underground Retention Facility 7 11 11 Total: 374 417 423 Table 6.4.4 Unknown Owner Structural BMPs Type 2020 2021 2022 Surface Detention Facility 18 12 8 Underground Detention Facility - - - Surface Retention Facility 14 5 5 Underground Retention Facility - 1 - Total: 32 18 13 Table 6.4.5 Summary Land Classification 2020 2021 2022 Public 41 70 97 Private 322 445 611 HOA 374 417 423 Unknown 32 18 13 Total: 769 950 1,144 The MS4 also completes an annual analysis to identify high-priority structural BMPs. To complete the analysis, the MS4 completes a risk assessment in GIS using the following criteria: 125 SECTION 6.0 - POST-CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM 8  Size: Structural BMPs larger than 1,076 square feet, analyzed using geometric data in GIS  Proximity: Within 500 feet of an impaired waterbody, analyzed using a 500’ buffer in GIS  Type: Surface detention or underground detention facility, analyzed using GIS data The MS4 deems structural BMPs that meet all criteria as high-priority and manages them per the protocol detailed in SWMP Section 6.5. Table 6.4.6 includes totals, and Table 6.6.1 includes specific structural BMP information. Table 6.4.6 High-Priority Structural BMP Ownership Land Classification 2020 2021 2022 Public 13 13 12 Private 3 4 2 HOA 3 1 1 Unknown 1 1 0 Total: 20 19 15 6.5 Inspection Program The MS4 completes inspections of typical and high-priority structural BMPs using qualitative and quantitative data collection practices. Inspection frequencies for the two types include:  Typical: Complaint-based, field observation, or as needed; no reoccurring return intervals are established at this time.  High-Priority: Annual inspection per the requirements detailed in the MS4 Permit. The MS4 receives permission from the underlying property owner to access the structural BMP. Once granted, a typical inspection involves the review of the physical characteristics, flow path, maintenance needs, and facility geometry. The MS4 documents facility conditions using the Stormwater Facility Inspection Form, and then assigns each facility a maintenance priority level:  Low: Structural BMP appears to be functioning as designed.  Medium: Structural BMP requires minor to moderate sediment and vegetation maintenance to mitigate the risk of flooding, waterway pollution, and infrastructure failure.  High: Structural BMP requires significant sediment dredging, vegetation removal, and/or infrastructure repairs to restore function. The MS4 typically sends the owner a letter, inspection form, map, and maintenance guide, and requests they submit a plan to complete necessary maintenance and resolve the identified issues. The MS4 has completed the following inspections of structural BMPs (including high-priority): Table 6.5.1 Post-Construction Facility Inspections Land Type 2020 2021 2022 # Inspected % of Total # Inspected % of Total # Inspected % of Total Public 13 - 18 - 12 - Private 4 - 10 - 4 - HOA 30 - 8 - 18 - Unknown 1 - 0 - 0 - Total: 48 6% 36 4% 34 3% 126 SECTION 6.0 - POST-CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM 9 Graphic 6.5.2 Post-Construction Inspection Program Map 127 SECTION 6.0 - POST-CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM 10 6.6 High-Priority Structural BMPs The MS4 manages the following structural BMPs as high-priority: Table 6.6.1 High-Priority Structural BMPs # Facility ID Owner Area (ft2) Receiving Waterbody 2020 Rating 2021 Rating 2022 Rating 1 DP.H06.00026 MSU Facility 1 3,185 Mandeville Creek Low Low Low 2 DP.H06.00400 MSU Facility 2 7,591 Mandeville Creek Low Low Low 3 DP.H06.00024 MSU Facility 3 11,829 Mandeville Creek Low Low Low 4 DP.H06.00023 MSU Facility 4 4,667 Mandeville Creek Medium Low Low 5 DP.H06.00028 MSU Facility 5 1,294 Mandeville Creek Low Low Low 6 DP.H06.00025 MSU Facility 6 7,231 Mandeville Creek Low Low Low 7 DP.I51.00073 City WRF 1 10,744 East Gallatin River Low Low Low 8 DP.I51.00075 City WRF 2 1,355 East Gallatin River Low Low Low 9 DP.I51.00074 City WRF 3 10,314 East Gallatin River Low Low Low 10 DP.E02.00006 City Vehicle Maintenance 5,577 East Gallatin River Medium Low Low 11 DP.H04.00006 Bozeman School District 1 7,188 Mandeville Creek Low Low Low 12 DP.G02.00017 Tange's Addition 2,245 Mandeville Creek Medium High High 13 DP.F01.00026 SID 674 7,354 East Gallatin River High High Med 14 DP.H07.00022 South University District 1 14,775 Mandeville Creek Low Low Low 15 DP.H07.00023 South University District 2 26,987 Mandeville Creek Low Low Low 16 DP.G03.00050 Headwaters Academy 1959 Mandeville Creek - Low Low The following summarizes the inspection activity for each high-priority structural BMP: 1-6. MSU Facilities 1-6  2020: All facilities inspected and reports submitted to MSU Facilities Director other than MSU Facility 6, which was under construction.  2021: All facilities inspected and reports submitted to MSU Facilities Director  2022: All facilities inspected and reports submitted to MSU Facilities Director 7-9. City WRF 1-3  2020: All facilities inspected and reports submitted to the WRF Superintendent.  2021: All facilities inspected and reports submitted to the WRF Superintendent.  2022: All inspected and reports submitted to the WRF Superintendent. City Vehicle Maintenance  2020: All facilities were inspected and the report was submitted to the Streets Superintendent; the detention pond was rehabilitated.  2021: Inspected and report submitted to the Streets Superintendent.  2022: Inspected and report submitted to the Streets Superintendent Bozeman School District #1 128 SECTION 6.0 - POST-CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM 11  2020: BSD #1 Inspected and report submitted to Facilities Director.  2021: BSD #1 Inspected and report submitted to Facilities Director.  2022: BSD #1 Inspected Tanges Addition  2020: Inspected and report compiled; however, not sent due to legal/policy issues.  2021: Inspected and report compiled; sent to the owner  2022: Inspected. The owner is planning further analysis with neighboring site development. SID 674  2020: Inspected and report compiled; however, not sent due to legal/policy issues.  2021: Inspected and determined to be City-owned.  2022: Inspected and maintenance to inlet and portion of pond completed. 14-15. South University District 1-2  2020: Inspected and compiled report; however, not sent due to legal/policy issues.  2021: Inspected and determined to be City-owned.  2022: Inspected 16. Headwaters Academy  2022: Inspected and report compiled. 6.7 Enforcement Response Plan This section outlines the MS4’s Enforcement Response Plan (ERP), which provides strategies and authority to ensure owners install, operate, and maintain structural BMPs. Design: SWMP Section 6.2 references documents containing regulations and legal requirements regarding structural BMP design. If a developer does not fully comply with regulations, the MS4’s formal response is to deny the site plan, making it impossible to acquire a building permit. If a developer begins construction without a building permit, a Community Development Code Compliance offer issues a Stop Work Order per BMC Sec. 38.200.040. Installation: SWMP Section 6.3 details the MS4’s structural BMP review process. During this stage, the MS4 uses the following enforcement protocols:  Informal, Formal, and Judicial: When a pollutant control issue is identified, the MS4 submits a written notification to the owner and uses the protocol in SWMP Section 5.3. The Construction ERP is the regulatory authority until the site reaches final site stabilization. Bozeman Municipal Code Section 40.04.350 outlines the permission protocols to enter the property for inspection.  Formal: If an engineering-related issue (groundwater, site plan deviation, utility conflict) occurs, the owner is required to coordinate with the Engineering Division to find a solution. The MS4 will withhold occupancy on the project and not accept infrastructure until the owner resolves the identified issues. Operation and Maintenance: SWMP Section 6.5 outlines the MS4s structural BMP inspection program. Upon sending the documents, the MS4 uses the following enforcement protocol: 129 SECTION 6.0 - POST-CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM 12  Informal: The MS4 communicates with the owner and shares the results of the facility inspection. A six-month timeline is set, which requires the owner to submit a maintenance plan to the MS4 describing how the identified issues will be resolved.  Formal and Judicial: The MS4 does not have a formal policy or process at this time. The Engineering Design Standards Update and the Stormwater Facilities Plan Update will ultimately determine this portion of MS4’s ERP. The MS4 plans to present policy recommendations from these efforts to the City Commission for decision as soon as they are complete. 6.8 Performance Tracking The MS4 completes a Structural BMP Compliance Audit annually, evaluating 50 randomly chosen structural BMPs to determine their condition, based on the following criteria: Vegetation Management: Evidence of reoccurring cattail, grass, and woody shrub removal Flow path: As designed, blocked by vegetation and/or sediment, and channelization Sediment accumulation, stagnant water, or accumulation of vegetation which reduces volume and infiltration rate After evaluation, the MS4 grades each structural BMP using one of the following categories: 0-Points: Structural BMP requires sediment dredging, vegetation removal, or infrastructure repairs to restore function 1-Point: Structural BMP requires minor to moderate sediment and vegetation maintenance to maintain function 2-Points: Structural BMP appears to be well-maintained and functioning as designed The MS4 compiles the collected data and is summarized in Table 6.8.1: Table 6.8.1 Stormwater Structural BMP Audit Scores Audit Year Audit Dates Trend Total Points Earned Score 2018 October 17 - 26 - 25/100 25% 2019 November 14 - 15 Increasing 32/100 32% 2020 November 2 - 6 Increasing 56/100 56% 2021 October 18 - 19 Increasing 74/100 74% 2022 October 25-27 Decreasing 67/100 67% 2018 Summary:  Wal-Mart, Safeway, and other private entities maintain their structural BMPs more frequently, yielding an average score six times greater than HOAs.  Structural BMPs integrated into landscapes are in better condition than those hidden.  The overwhelming majority of HOAs are unaware of their responsibilities and do not complete maintenance regardless of previous engagement by the City.  Current design standards allow for the construction of inadequate systems. 2019 Summary:  Structural BMPs integrated into landscapes are in better condition than those hidden.  The overwhelming majority of HOAs are ignorant of their maintenance responsibilities.  Current design standards allow for the construction of inadequate systems.  Legal private property access is an issue that requires consideration and resolution  Average Scores: Private = 1.0 and HOA = 0.3 130 SECTION 6.0 - POST-CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM 13 2020 Summary:  New structural BMPs rate high and were a disproportionate majority, elevating the score.  HOA scores are improving mainly resulting from the addition of new structural BMPs.  Older private structural BMPs declined in performance.  Many structural BMPs are located on parkland property and may be the responsibility of the MS4 due to the recently approved Parks and Trails District.  Average Scores: Private = 1.0 and HOA = 1.2 2021 Summary:  New structural BMPs as related to the rate of development growth in the MS4, score higher as a result of their disproportionate majority, effectively elevating the audit score  HOA scores are improving as a result of new developments in the MS4  Many structural BMPs are located on parkland property and rarely are the responsibility of the MS4  Older structural BMPs in HOAs have become a focal point for maintenance inspections and association communications  Average Scores: Private = 1.7 and HOA = 1.4 2022 Summary:  HOA scores are improving as a result of new developments in the MS4  Randomized selection resulted in a lowest number of private sites compared to prior reporting periods.  Older structural BMPs in HOAs have become a focal point for maintenance inspections and association communications  Average Scores: Private = 1.6 and HOA = 1.6 131 SECTION 6.0 - POST-CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM 14 6.9 Ongoing and Future Initiatives The following initiatives are planned or ongoing to facilitate improved plans, policies, and ordinances related to the MS4’s Post-Construction Program: 2021 Engineering Design Standards Update: A project that includes reviewing and updating MS4’s Engineering Standards. Improvements will consist of better incorporating the MS4 Permit’s water quality requirements, integrating the Montana Post-Construction BMP Guidance Manual, and standardizing forms, such as drainage reports and maintenance agreements. Stormwater Facility Plan Update: The MS4’s Facility Plan has not received an update since 2008. The project will include reviewing and developing policy recommendations related to deficient or previously unexplored program components. Center for Watershed Protection Code and Ordinance Worksheet: In 2020, the MS4 met with the Parks, Planning, and Engineering Divisions and completed the worksheet to determine barriers to implementing stormwater and land-use structural and non-structural BMPs. The worksheet was helpful for barrier identification and internal discussion. The MS4 found that some of the recommendations were not applicable or practicable due to various local conditions. Further, the MS4 confirmed it already has aggressive and protective environmental regulations in place such as; watercourse setbacks, open space requirements, a Graphic 6.8.1 Facility Inspection Compliance Scores 2018-2022 132 SECTION 6.0 - POST-CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM 15 suite of structural BMP options, strategic land use planning, and impervious area maximums. In summary, the MS4 identified the following items for potential improvement:  Recommendation: Allow for alternative sidewalk and driveway materials. o Current Status: The MS4 has seen a variety of permeable concrete paver surfaces installed in the last few years, which current design standards do not explicitly cover. o Future Opportunity: Consider modifying codes as a part of the Standards Update.  Recommendation: Secure permanent funding arrangements for the long-term management and maintenance of open space. o Current Status: The City requires the establishment of HOAs at the time of subdivision development; however, it does not require financial guarantees regarding the maintenance of open space, which often includes stormwater facilities and natural resource areas. This issue spans numerous policies but focuses on the lack of assurance that HOAs are viably maintained and funded in perpetuity. Often HOAs dissolve due to a lack of volunteers, representation, or ability to raise money. o Future Opportunity: Review policy options as a part of the Facility Plan Update.  Recommendation: Long-term management plans that conserve natural systems for all open space areas. o Current Status: Maintenace plans and open space agreements are typically not specific and fail to address all needs adequately. o Future Opportunity: Consider reviewing policies during the City of Bozeman’s Parks, Recreation, Open Space, Trails (PROST) Plan update.  Recommendation: Require limits of disturbance to be shown on construction plans and physically marked at the site. o Current Status: The Montana Construction General Permit does not require o Future Opportunity: Coordinate with the Montana Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) during the next permit issuance.  Recommendation: Provide a reference to clear, understandable, and local or regionally based design guidance or stormwater manual. o Current Status: The Montana Post-Construction BMP Design Guidance Manual exists; however, it is not referenced nor codified in the MS4’s Engineering Standards. o Future Opportunity: Consider modifying codes as a part of the Standards Update.  Recommendation: Mandate performance bonds and periodic inspections to ensure proper installation of stormwater practices based on the approved plans. o Current Status: No requirements exist. o Future Opportunity: Review policy options as a part of the Facility Plan Update.  Recommendation: Include provisions for runoff reduction practice easements, inspector right-of-entry, maintenance agreements, and post-construction inspections. o Current Status: The listed items either do not exist or require improvement. o Future Opportunity: Consider modifying codes as a part of the Standards Update. 133 SECTION 6.0 - POST-CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM 16  Recommendation: Require some percentage of treatment on-site if off-site stormwater compliance is authorized. o Current Status: The MS4 does not allow offsite stormwater management. o Future Opportunity: Review policy options as a part of the Facility Plan Update. 134 SECTION 6.0 - POST-CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM 17 Blank Page 135 Section 7.0 Good Housekeeping Program Graphic 7.0.2: Sediment management facilityGraphic 7.0.1: Street sweeping debris pile 136 SECTION 7.0 - GOOD HOUSEKEEPING PROGRAM 2 Blank Page 137 SECTION 7.0 - GOOD HOUSEKEEPING PROGRAM 3 7.1 Introduction The MS4 strives to improve waterway health, protect public safety, and comply with its MS4 Permit through the responsible management of its storm sewer system, facilities, and daily work activities by: Inspecting, maintaining, and repairing storm sewer system assets; Mitigating stormwater pollutants through the development and implementation of Facility and Activity Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans; and Maintaining an environmentally conscious workforce through training. SWMP Section 7.0 details the following components necessary to administer the MS4’s Good Housekeeping Program, including: Infrastructure Operations (7.2) Stormwater Management Team Training (7.3) Facility Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (FSWPPP) (7.4) Activity Stormwater Pollution Program (ASWPPP) (7.5) Activity and Facility Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Training (7.6) 7.2 Infrastructure Operation The City inspects, maintains, and repairs its storm sewer system on an annual basis. MSU maintains infrastructure within its boundary. The following Divisions are responsible for conducting infrastructure operations: Table 7.2.1: Infrastructure Operations Operation Goal Season Operational Area Stormwater Division Operations Storm Sewer Inspection (CCTV) 20% per year Year-round Citywide Storm Sewer Cleaning 20% per year Above freezing Citywide Storm Sewer Repair As Required Spring, Summer, Fall Citywide Treatment Unit Maintenance Annually Fall Individual Locations Infiltration Facility Maintenance As needed Fall Individual Locations Debris Hauling Annually Varies Sediment Facility Streets Division Operations Spring Cleanup Annually Spring Citywide Fall Cleanup Annually Fall Citywide Street Sweeping Annually Year-round Citywide Sweepings Hauling Annually Varies East Gallatin Area The MS4 uses the following metrics to track performance. The performance data comes from the MS4’s Operation’s Dashboard, and infrastructure totals from SWMP Section 4.8. The metrics include: Inlets and Manholes Cleaned: Storm sewer inlets and manholes serve two purposes: (1) mitigate flood risk by collecting runoff from streets, parking lots, alleyways, and other hard surfaces, and (2) treat stormwater by capturing sediment, trash, and other pollutants in their sumps.  Performance Goal: Clean 20% of public inlets and manholes annually  Calculation Type: Total assets (includes duplicate effort) 138 SECTION 7.0 - GOOD HOUSEKEEPING PROGRAM 4 Table 7.2.2: Inlet and Manholes Totals Year City/MDT Maintained City/MDT Total % Complete MSU Maintained MSU Total % Complete 2018 742 3,778 20% 256 362 71% 2019 809 4,216 19% 263 362 73% 2020 909 4,188 22% 207 365 57% 2021 894 4,098 22% 244 365 67% 2022 405 4,311 9% - - - Storm Sewer Cleaned: Storm sewers serve two purposes: (1) convey stormwater collected by inlets to their point of discharge, and (2) capture sediment, trash, and other pollutants that fall out of suspension, requiring reoccurring maintenance to remain functional.  Performance Measure: Clean 20% of pipes annually  Calculation Type: Total assets (mains and laterals, includes duplicate effort) Table 7.2.3: Storm Sewer Totals Year City/MDT Maintained City/MDT Total % Complete MSU Maintained MSU Total % Complete 2018 17 miles 71 miles 24% .1 miles 8 miles 1% 2019 14 miles 77 miles 18% .1 miles 8 miles 1% 2020 17 miles 78 miles 19% .1 miles 8 miles 1% 2021 17 miles 76 miles 21% .2 miles 8 miles 2.5% 2022 8.5 miles 82 miles 10% - - - Infrastructure Repairs: Infrastructure repairs or “spot repairs” serve two purposes: (1) fix known pipe failures and restrictions to ensure the adequate flow of stormwater, and (2) repair open sections of pipe where scouring of subgrade soils occur, mitigating the chance of a road failure and sediment load contribution.  Performance Measure: Pipe integrity indicator  Calculation Type: Total repairs Table 7.2.4: Infrastructure Repair Totals Year City Total MSU Total 2018 16 Repairs 2 Repairs 2019 10 Repairs 0 Repairs 2020 3 Repairs 1 Repair 2021 5 Repairs 1 Repair 2022 2 Repairs 2 Repairs Television Inspections (CCTV): Storm sewer inspections serve two purposes: (1) identification and prioritization of structural and maintenance needs for underground infrastructure and (2) identifies illicit discharges, cross-connections, or illegal pipe connections.  Performance Measure: Inspect 20% of storm sewer mains annually  Calculation Type: Total assets (mains and laterals, includes duplicate effort), likely underreported, due to inspecting pipes before they are accepted into City infrastructure. Assets, length, and work orders can’t be aligned until they are accepted. 139 SECTION 7.0 - GOOD HOUSEKEEPING PROGRAM 5 Table 7.2.5: Television Inspection Totals Year City/MDT Maintained City/MDT Total % Complete MSU Maintained MSU Total % Complete 2018 14 miles 71 miles 20% .4 miles 8 miles 5% 2019 11 miles 77 miles 14% .02 miles 8 miles .2% 2020 9 miles 78 miles 12% .5 miles 8 miles 6% 2021 10 miles 76 miles 13% .6 miles 8 miles 7.5% 2022 9 miles 82 miles 11% - - - 7.3 Stormwater Management Team Training The MS4 completes trainings per MS4 Permit II.B.1-4 as identified in the sections below. Training materials and certifications are stored electronically on the MS4’s server and updated annually to address new MS4 Permit requirements, stay up-to-date on SWMP changes, and the implementation of new BMPs. Stormwater Management Team (SWMT) o Stormwater Program Manager, Program Specialist, Project Coordinator, and Technicians complete a comprehensive training of MS4 Permit requirements and implementation responsibilities. An annual work plan is developed outlining BMPs, implementation responsibility, and estimated work load. Additionally, permit responsibilities are regularly assigned via a weekly work task meeting involving all SWMT members. New SWMT members receive awareness training within 90 days of employment. Construction Site Personnel o Stormwater Program Specialist and Technicians receive numerous Construction Site Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) trainings, including Stormwater Management and Erosion Control During Construction, SWPPP Preparer/Administrator, and Compliance Evaluation Inspector. Specifically, Staff are trained how to review SWPPPs and conduct compliance evaluation inspections - using the MS4’s plan review and site inspection checklists - for compliance with requirements contained in the Technology Base Effulent Limitations of the most current Construction General Permit. Additional trainings include Dewatering Operations During Construction and a BMP Field Academy. Post-Construction Personnel o Stormwater Program Manager, Project Coordinator, and Development Review Engineers receive plan review training. Development Review Engineers utilize a plan review checklist to ensure consistent review and document compliance with with state and local post- construction requirements. Project Coordinator conducts stormwater facility inspection trainings with Technicians as outlined in SWMP Sections 6.5, 6.6, and 6.7. Field and Facility Personnel o Field and Facility personnel whose work activities have the potential to impact stormwater quality receive training during the 1st and 4th years of the MS4 Permit term. Applicable Facilities and Activities in which Staff reveive training are outlined in SWMP Sections 7.4, 7.5, and 7.6. Trainings include an overview of requirements 140 SECTION 7.0 - GOOD HOUSEKEEPING PROGRAM 6 contained in the most current MS4 Permit and applicable FSWPPPs and/or ASWPPPs, including SOG’s, required BMP’s to mitigate stormwater pollutants generated from municipal facilities and activities, and spill response procedures. Conferences and Miscelaneous Trainings o SWMT members attend various conferences and miscellaneous trainings. Conferences attended include the Montana Stormwater Conference, Water Environment Federation Technical Conference, International Erosion Control Association Annual Conference, StormCon, and Montana Section AWWA Conference. Miscellaneous trainings completed include Virtual Designing Successful Stormwater Facilities with Maintenance and Enforcement in Mind, Virtual ADS/Baysaver BMP Design and Maintenance Workshop, WQM 130 Stormwater Management for Industrial Operations, CI200B: QCIS – Qualified Compliance Inspection of Stormwater, and Hazardous Waste Training. 7.4 Facility Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program The purpose of the MS4’s Facility Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (FSWPPP) is to mitigate stormwater pollutants generated on municipal facilities. The MS4 works to ensure all municipal facilities meet or exceed the following Facility Minimum Standards (FMS): Connect interior wash bays and interior floor drains to the sanitary sewer. Store chemicals under cover and/or within secondary containment. Prevent tracking at facility entries, exits, and within parking areas. Stock spill kits with instructions, disposable bags, PPE, and absorbent products. Perform preventative maintenance on vehicles and equipment. Wash vehicles and equipment in designated locations. Contain fuel tanks with secondary containment. Implement BMPs for identified pollutants. Maintain stormwater facilities per the following frequencies: (1) Stormwater basins, annual vegetation and debris clearing, 10-15 year dredging; (2) Mechanical separators, annual vacuuming; (3) Infiltration facilities, annual flushing; (4) Parking and drive surfaces, as required; and (5) Inlets, manholes, and pipes, five-year flushing, vacuuming, and inspection cycle. Stabilize disturbed areas within 14 days. The MS4 uses the following FSWPPP inspection protocol: If applicable, collect stormwater runoff sample to characterize facility pollutant concentrations. Inspect facility for compliance with FMSs. Review existing documents, such as existing Standard Operating Guides (SOGs), safety data sheets, spill documentation, and stormwater facility record drawings. Coordinate with applicable leadership and develop FSWPPP that includes:  Overview  Stormwater Team  Site Description  Impaired Waterbodies  Sampling  Pollution Identification  Site Assessment  Spill Response Plan  Training  Inspections  Infrastructure Improvements  Record Keeping and Reporting  Site Map 141 Implement FSWPPP. Train applicable field staff. Re-inspect and update the FSWPPP annually. The following facilities are subject to the FSWPPP protocol: Table 7.4.1: MS4 Facilities Inventory Facility ID Facility Name Facility Classification Initial Inspection FSWPPP Development FSWPPP Updates 1.1 City Shops Complex Operations and Storage Area 2019 2019 2020, 2021, 2022 1.2 Vehicle Maintenance Facility Operations and Storage Area 2019 2019 2020, 2021, 2022 2.1 Water Treatment Plant Treatment Works 2020 2020 2021, 2022 2.2 Water Reclamation Facility Treatment Works 2019 2019 2020, 2021, 2022 3.1 East Gallatin Storage Area Material Storage Area 2020 2020 2021, 2022 3.2 Solid Waste Landfill Material Storage Area 2019 2019 2020, 2021, 2022 3.3 Snow Storage Area Material Storage Area 2019 2019 2020, 2021, 2022 The MS4 removed the following facilities from the 2022 FSWPPP Inventory. 1. Laurel Glen Operations Facility 2. Cemetery Shops Complex 3. Bozeman Public Safety Center 4. City Hall 5. Fire Stations 1 – 3. Inspections of the Facilities determined that they do not contribute contaminants to the MS4 beyond what is found at other similar buildings in town. Post-construction features and infrastructure at these Facilities are maintained at the regular interval. Staff conducted inspections of each Facility using the standard form and inspection protocol. During Facility inspections, Staff documented that all operations and material storage at these Facilities occurs indoors. Inspection reports documenting the no negative impacts findings are stored electronically by the Stormwater Division. 142 SECTION 7.0 - GOOD HOUSEKEEPING PROGRAM 8 Graphic 7.4.3: MS4 facilities 143 SECTION 7.0 - GOOD HOUSEKEEPING PROGRAM 9 Table 7.4.2: MSU Facilities Facility ID Facility Name Facility Classification Initial Inspection FSWPPP Development FSWPPP Update 1.4 University Shops Facility Operations and Storage Area 2019 2021 2022 3.4 MSU Material Storage Area Material Storage Area 2020 2021 2022 7.5 Activity Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program The purpose of the MS4’s Activity Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (ASWPPP) is to mitigate stormwater pollutants generated from municipal operations. The MS4 works to ensure all operations meet or exceed the following Activity Minimum Standards (AMS): Protect street surfaces and inlets by deploying controls that capture, contain, and allow for the collection and disposal of generated pollutants. Cover or contain material stockpiles and control run-on. Stabilize disturbed areas within 14 days of activities. Prevent tracking and the off-site migration of debris. Capture and dispose concrete waste. Manage dewatering flows to remove sediment to the maximum extent practicable before entering the storm sewer system or waterways. The MS4 uses the following ASWPPP inspection protocol: Review activity and establish baseline compliance with AMSs. Coordinate with applicable leadership and develop ASWPPP that includes:  Overview  Stormwater Team  Activity Description  Pollutant Identification  Standards Assessment and SOGs  Training  Record Keeping Implement ASWPPP. Train applicable field staff. The following activities are subject to the ASWPPP protocol: Table 7.5.1: MS4 Activities Activity Name Division Responsible Entity Inspection Year ASWPPP Development ASWPPP Evaluation Trenching and Excavation Water and Sewer City 2020 2020 2022 Sidewalk and Curb Construction Water, Sewer, and Streets City 2021 2021 2022 Concrete Cutting Water, Sewer, and Streets City 2021 2021 2022 144 SECTION 7.0 - GOOD HOUSEKEEPING PROGRAM 10 Table 7.5.1: MS4 Activities Activity Name Division Responsible Entity Inspection Year ASWPPP Development ASWPPP Evaluation Roadway Traction Sand Application Streets City 2020 2020 2022 Solid Waste Collection Solid Waste City 2020 2020 2022 Parks Mowing Parks and Rec City 2021 2021 2022 Tree Planting, Pruning, Removal Forestry City 2021 2021 2022 Parking Lot & Garage Maintenance Streets City 2021 2022 2022 Table 7.5.2: MSU Activities Activity Name Division Responsible Entity Inspection Year ASWPPP Development ASWPPP Evaluation Emergency Water Main Breaks Water/Sewer/Storm City 2019 2019 2022 Sanitary Sewer Overflows Water/Sewer/Storm City 2019 2019 2022 Parking Lot & Garage Maintenance MSU Facilities MSU 2021 2022 Arena Construction MSU Facilities MSU 2021 2021 7.6 Activity and Facility SWPPP Training Upon completion of FSWPPPs and ASWPPs, the MS4 trains applicable field Staff to increase awareness and reduce and mitigate stormwater pollutants generated from specific activities and facilities. Employees receive training during the 1st and 4th year of the permit term. Training content includes: o General stormwater awareness, o Overview of the contents of the most current MS4 Permit, o Contents of applicable FSWPPPs/ASWPPPs, and o Standard Operating Guidelines and BMPs implemented to minimize generated pollutants. 145 SECTION 7.0 - GOOD HOUSEKEEPING PROGRAM 11 Table 7.6.1: Awareness Training Content Division Stormwater In Bozeman Video Rain Check Chapter 1: Intro Rain Check Chapter 2: Housekeeping Rain Check Chapter 3: Spill control Rain Check Chapter 4: Fueling Rain Check Chapter 5: Vehicle Maintenance Rain Check Chapter 6: Vehicle Washing Rain Check Chapter 7: Materials Management Rain Check Chapter 8: Waste Management Rain Check Chapter 9: Facility Maintenance Rain Check Chapter 12: Landscaping Water/Sewer/Storm X X X X X X X X X - X Forestry X X X X X X X X X - X Parks and Cemetery X X X X X X X X X - X Streets X X X X X X X X X - X Solid Waste X X X X X X X X X X - Water Treatment Plant X X X X X X X X X X - Water Rec. Facility X X X X X X X X X X - MSU Operations X X X X X X X X X X X Table 7.6.2: ASWPPP Training Content Division Water Main Breaks Sanitary Sewer Overflows Trenching and Excavation Sidewalk and Curb Construction Curb Cutting Traction Sand Application Solid Waste Collection Arena Construction Parks Mowing Tree Planting Water/Sewer/Storm X X X X X - - - - - Facilities - - - - - - - - - - Forestry - - - - - - - - - X Parks and Cemetery - - - - - - - - X X Streets - - - X X X - - - - Solid Waste - - - - - - X - - - MSU Operations X X - - - X X X X X 146 SECTION 7.0 - GOOD HOUSEKEEPING PROGRAM 12 Table 7.6.3: FSWPPP Training Content Division MSU Shops Facility City Shops Complex Vehicle Maintenance Facility Laurel Glen Operations Facility East Gallatin Storage Area Closed Landfill Snow Storage Area MSU Material Storage Area Water Treatment Plant Water Reclamation Facility Public Parking Garage and Lots MSU Parking Garage and Lots Bozeman Public Safety Facility Fire Stations #1-3 Parks and Recreation Water/Sewer/Storm - X X X - - - - - - - - - - - Forestry - - X - X - - - - - - - - - X Parks and Cemetery - X - - X - - - - - - - - - X Streets - X X - X - X - - - - - - - - Solid Waste - - - - - X - - - - - - - - - Water Treatment Plant - - - - - - - - X - - - - - - Water Rec. Facility - - - - - - - - - X - - - - - MSU Operations X - - - - - - X - - - X - - - Table 7.6.4: Training Program Summary Division 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Awareness Training FSWPPP and ASWPPP Training Awareness Training FSWPPP and ASWPPP Training Awareness Training FSWPPP and ASWPPP Training Awareness Training FSWPPP and ASWPPP Training Awareness Training FSWPPP and ASWPPP Training Water/Sewer/Storm 7 - 2 - 21 21 19 19 23 23 Forestry 19 - 9 - 24 24 - - 5 5 Parks and Cemetery 17 17 16 16 19 19 18 18 4 4 Streets 15 15 14 14 14 14 11 11 16 16 Solid Waste 17 17 16 16 23 23 16 16 18 18 Water Treatment Plant 7 - 2 - 21 21 19 19 9 9 Water Rec. Facility 9 9 14 14 14 14 11 11 * MSU Operations 0 - 14 - 17 17 0 0 *: Facility receives annual awareness and FSWPPP/ ASWPPP training per Industrial Stormwater Permit. 147 SECTION 7.0 - GOOD HOUSEKEEPING PROGRAM 13 Blank Page 148 Section 8.0 Sampling and Evaluation Program Graphic 8.0.2: Installing in-stream sampling equipment Graphic: 8.0.1: In-stream sampling equipment149 SECTION 8.0 - SAMPLING AND EVALUATION PROGRAM 2 Blank Page 150 SECTION 8.0 - SAMPLING AND EVALUATION PROGRAM 3 8.1 Introduction The MS4 strives to improve waterway health, protect public safety, and comply with its MS4 Permit by preforming sampling, testing, and reporting of stormwater discharges by completing the following protocols:  Impaired Waterbody Identification,  Storm Event Monitoring,  Impaired Waterbody Body Monitoring, and  BMP Effectiveness Monitoring. Data gathered from sampling protocols is used to advise policy, capital, and operational decisions, and provides a data-driven performance metric communicated to the public. 8.2 Impaired Waterbodies Identification There are four named impaired waterbodies which receive stormwater discharges from the MS4; Bozeman Creek, a.k.a. Sourdough Creek, Mandeville Creek, Bridger Creek and the East Gallatin River. The most recent impairment information is obtained from Montana DEQ’s Clean Water Act Information Center (http://cwaic.mt.gov/). Table 8.2.1 provides a summary of impairments for each waterbody. SWMP Section 4.7 contains an inventory of outfalls discharging to imparied waterbodies. Table 8.2.1: MS4 Waterbody TMDL Impairments Total Suspended Solids (TSS) Total Nitrogen (TN) Total Phosphorus (TP) E. coli Chlorophyll- a Alteration in stream-side or littoral vegetative cover Bozeman Creek X X X X X Mandeville Creek X X Bridger Creek X X East Gallatin River X X Montana DEQ completed TMDL assessments on the above waterbodies to determine pollutant impairments and MS4 Waste Load Allocations (WLA). Bozeman Creek is the only identified waterbody with an MS4 WLA, that being for TSS. The MS4 is not assigned a WLA for total nitrogen, total phosphorus, E. coli, cholorphyll-a, or alterations in stream-side or littoral vegetative cover. As a result the MS4 prioritizes sediment reduction BMPs which are describe in SWMP Sections 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, 5.0, 6.0, and 7.0. 8.3 Regulatory Requirements The MS4 General Permit requires the MS4 to perform sampling, testing, and reporting of stormwater discharges, semi-annually, during storm events resulting in a measureable amount of discharge. The MS4 implements sampling protocols that document stormwater discharge quality, quantify impacts to impaired waterbodies, evaluate BMP effectiveness, and track long-term trends in aquatic life. Sampling protocols include; Monitor stormwater discharges based on residential and commercial/industrial land-use types  See SWMP Section 8.4 Storm Event Monitoring Impaired Waterbody/TMDL Related Monitoring: Bozeman and Mandeville Creeks 151 SECTION 8.0 - SAMPLING AND EVALUATION PROGRAM 4  See SWMP Section 8.5 In-Stream Wet-Weather Monitoring, SWMP Section 2.2 TMDL Action Plan, and SWMP Section 2.5 Pollution Reduction Totals. BMP Effectiveness Monitoring for BMPs implemented to reduce pollutant loading from the MS4 to impaired waters.  See SWMP Section 8.6 Sediment Reduction Monitoring and SWMP Section 2.5 Pollution Reduction Totals. Impaired Waterbody Monitoring  See SWMP Section 8.7 Long-Term Trend Monitoring For Storm Event and In-Stream Wet-Weather monitoring, the MS4 conducts sampling, testing, and reporting of the following parameters: Total Suspended Solids (TSS), mg/L Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD), mg/L Total Nitrogen (TN), mg/L Total Phosphorus (TP), mg/L Copper (Cu), mg/L Lead (Pb), mg/L Zinc (Zn), mg/L Oils and Greases, mg/L pH, standard units Estimated Flow, gpm E. coli* *The MS4 plans to sample Bozeman Creek for E. coli beginning in 2023. SWMP Sections 8.6 and 8.7 describe parameters measured and data collected for Sediment Reduction and Long-Term Trend Monitoring. 8.4 Storm Event Monitoring Introduction: The MS4 collects semi-annual Storm Event samples from representative watersheds to characterize pollutant loading occurring from both residential and commercial/industrial land-use types before system treatment, such as stormwater basins, sumps, infiltration galleries, and mechanical separation. Locations: The MS4 has a network of four Storm Event monitoring locations: two within residential drainage basins and two within commercial/industrial drainage basins, including: Site: RES_01  Location: Near the intersection of S. Bozeman Ave. and E. Garfield St.  Land-use: Residential  Drainage Basin: Seven acres  Inlet ID: I.F06.00082 Latitude, Longitude: 45.667143  Inlet ID: I.F06.00083 Latitude, Longitude: 45.667143, -111.034724 Site: IND_01  Location: Near Commercial Dr. cul-de-sac (west)  Land-use: Commercial and Industrial  Drainage Basin: 10 acres  Inlet ID: I.E01.00184 Latitude, Longitude: 45.703061, -111.030112  Inlet ID: I.E01.00185 152 SECTION 8.0 - SAMPLING AND EVALUATION PROGRAM 5 Latitude, Longitude: 45.703164, -111.030428 Site: RES_02  Location: MSU Campus near the intersection of S. 12th Ave. and W. Garfield St.  Land-use: Residential  Drainage Basin: Four acres  Inlet ID: I.H06.00329 Latitude, Longitude: 45.666911, -111.054301  Inlet ID: I.H06.00259 Latitude, Longitude: 45.666970, -111.054226 Site: IND_02  Location: MSU Campus near the intersection of S. 6th Ave. and W. Garfield St.  Land-use: Industrial  Drainage Basin: Two acres  Inlet ID: I.G06.00603 Latitude, Longitude: 45.664409, -111.044957  Inlet ID: I.G06.00630 Latitude, Longitude: 45.664409, -111.044942 Methods: The MS4 collects Storm Event samples from storm sewer inlets at each site using Thermo- Scientific Nalgene Samplers (Samplers). Before runoff events, Staff installs each Sampler at the selected inlet grate and positions it to collect the first flush of urban runoff. Once full, the Sampler closes itself prohibiting additional collection or dilution of the original sample. Analysis: The MS4 collects, composites, and ships samples to a certified laboratory, which analyzes the parameters identified in SWMP Section 8.3. The MS4 estimates flow, in gallons per minute (gpm), using the Rational Formula where: Q = CiA Q: Peak runoff rate (cfs converted to gpm) C: Runoff coefficient (C-Factor, Bozeman Engineering Standards) i: Rainfall intensity (in./hr.) A : Drainage area (acres) Table 8.4.1: Sampling Location Runoff Coefficients (C-Factors) Location Name Primary Land Use Runoff Coefficient (C-Factor) RES_01 Low to Medium Density Residential 0.35 RES_02 Dense Residential 0.50 IND_01 Industrial 0.80 IND_02 Industrial 0.80 153 SECTION 8.0 - SAMPLING AND EVALUATION PROGRAM 6 Table 8.4.2: Storm Event Monitoring Results * Reporting Limit (RL) Site TSS mg/L Oil & Grease mg/L Total Nitro. mg/L Phosp. mg/L Zinc mg/L Lead mg/L Cu mg/L COD mg/L pH Flow gpm RES_01: 2017 (1) 203 2.00 6.20 0.908 0.1160 0.0052 0.0220 251.00 6.7 N/A RES_01: 2017 (2) 368 5.10 RL 12.00 1.230 0.1790 0.0073 0.0300 175.00 7.0 N/A RES_01: 2018 (1) 460 4.00 14.00 1.920 0.2720 0.0092 0.0290 708.00 6.4 55.0 RES_01: 2018 (2) 113 1.00 RL 2.30 0.544 0.1220 0.0033 0.0130 129.00 6.5 22.0 RES_01: 2019 (1) 5890 6.00 28.80 8.400 2.0200 0.1750 0.3380 3330.00 7.4 49.5 RES_01: 2019 (2) 206 1.00 RL 5.50 0.680 0.2100 0.0060 0.0240 258.00 6.9 14.3 RES_01: 2020 (1) 2300 3.00 21.50 4.400 0.6200 0.0530 0.0760 1340.00 6.7 110.0 RES_01: 2020 (2) 109 1.00 RL 3.40 0.6400 0.1400 0.0040 0.0200 363.00 6.3 49.5 RES_01: 2021 (1) 419 3.00 13.40 1.5100 0.2100 0.0100 0.0410 559.00 6.9 - RES_01: 2021 (2) 154.0 1.00 RL 13.10 1.3800 0.3500 0.0100 0.0460 729.00 6.2 23.5 RES_01: 2022 (1) 300.0 2.00 7.10 1.2600 0.2200 0.0110 0.0400 287 6.8 48.8 RES_01: 2022 (2) 963.0 1.00 14.20 3.5100 1.0700 0.0460 0.1200 1140 6.6 121.0 RES_01: 2023 (1) - - - - - - - - - - RES_01: 2023 (2) - - - - - - - - - - RES_01: 2024 (1) - - - - - - - - - - RES_01: 2024 (2) - - - - - - - - - - RES_01: 2025 (1) - - - - - - - - - - RES_01: 2025 (2) - - - - - - - - - - RES_01: 2026 (1) - - - - - - - - - - RES_01: 2026 (2) - - - - - - - - - - RES_01 Median 334.0 2.00 12.55 1.3200 0.2150 0.0096 0.0350 461.00 6.7 68.7 RES_02: 2017 (1) - - - - - - - - - - RES_02: 2017 (2) - - - - - - - - - - RES_02: 2018 (1) 1430 15.00 8.40 2.030 0.6520 0.0367 0.0840 605.00 7.0 18.0 RES_02: 2018 (2) 199 3.00 3.40 0.457 0.2610 0.0081 0.0220 234.00 6.8 18.0 RES_02: 2019 (1) 806 9.00 8.60 1.930 0.5000 0.0410 0.0820 579.00 7.5 40.39 RES_02: 2019 (2) 568 8.00 17.50 2.060 0.7500 0.0220 0.0810 1100.00 6.8 11.7 RES_02: 2020 (1) 1490 3.00 9.80 2.220 0.5100 0.0300 0.0490 487.00 6.8 89.76 RES_02: 2020 (2) 176 3.00 7.40 0.800 0.2900 0.0070 0.0260 382.00 6.4 40.4 RES_02: 2021 (1) 701 2.00 11.20 1.52 0.4200 0.0180 0.0490 601.00 6.8 - RES_02: 2021 (2) 334 4.00 13.90 1.360 0.9200 0.0230 0.0710 835.00 6.3 19.21 RES_02: 2022 (1) 613 3.00 7.40 1.420 0.4000 0.0200 0.0480 613.00 7.9 39.6 RES_02: 2022 (2) 1780 5.00 6.90 2.520 1.2400 0.0840 0.1130 379.00 6.8 98.75 RES_02: 2023 (1) - - - - - - - - - - RES_02: 2023 (2) - - - - - - - - - - RES_02: 2024 (1) - - - - - - - - - - RES_02: 2024 (2) - - - - - - - - - - RES_02: 2025 (1) - - - - - - - - - - RES_02: 2025 (2) - - - - - - - - - - RES_02: 2026 (1) - - - - - - - - - - RES_02: 2026 (2) - - - - - - - - - - RES_02 Median 657.0 3.50 8.50 1.725 0.5050 0.0225 0.0600 590.00 6.8 56.1 IND_01: 2017 (1) 149 4.00 17.30 1.380 0.5780 0.0160 0.0440 292.00 7.0 - IND_01: 2017 (2) 1820 5.10 RL 11.68 1.320 33.3500 0.0371 0.0867 151.00 6.9 - IND_01: 2018 (1) 602 15.00 8.50 1.890 4.7100 0.0371 0.0620 606.00 7.3 179.5 IND_01: 2018 (2) 293 4.00 3.40 0.588 0.1910 0.0081 0.0270 195.00 7.0 71.8 154 SECTION 8.0 - SAMPLING AND EVALUATION PROGRAM 7 Table 8.4.2: Storm Event Monitoring Results * Reporting Limit (RL) Site TSS mg/L Oil & Grease mg/L Total Nitro. mg/L Phosp. mg/L Zinc mg/L Lead mg/L Cu mg/L COD mg/L pH Flow gpm IND_01: 2019 (1) 1470 4.00 4.90 1.960 1.5600 0.1020 0.1620 647.00 7.6 161.6 IND_01: 2019 (2) 333 2.00 10.70 0.940 0.8800 0.0250 0.0700 651.00 7.2 46.7 IND_01: 2020 (1) 2880 2.00 17.10 6.800 2.7200 0.1070 0.2450 1240.00 6.7 359.1 IND_01: 2020 (2) 347 2.00 4.80 0.880 1.7600 0.0280 0.0540 347.00 7.2 161.6 IND_01: 2021 (1) 655 2.000 9.20 2.380 2.4100 0.0350 0.080 602.00 7.1 - IND_01: 2021 (2) 438.0 9.00 12.30 1.470 0.7700 0.0200 0.0830 806.00 6.3 15.4 IND_01: 2022 (1) 170.0 2.00 4.70 0.580 0.6800 0.0570 0.1240 289.00 8.0 158.4 IND_01: 2022 (2) 657.0 2.00 8.50 1.840 3.3800 0.0440 0.1180 399.00 7.2 395.0 IND_01: 2023 (1) - - - - - - - - - - IND_01: 2023 (2) - - - - - - - - - - IND_01: 2024 (1) - - - - - - - - - - IND_01: 2024 (2) - - - - - - - - - - IND_01: 2025 (1) - - - - - - - - - - IND_01: 2025 (2) - - - - - - - - - - IND_01: 2026 (1) - - - - - - - - - - IND_01: 2026 (2) - - - - - - - - - - IND_01 Median 522.0 2.50 8.85 1.470 2.0850 0.0371 0.0844 500.50 7.2 224.4 IND_02: 2017 (1) - - - - - - - - - - IND_02: 2017 (2) - - - - - - - - - - IND_02: 2018 (1) 899 4.00 8.80 1.600 0.5600 0.0158 0.0570 592.00 6.7 14.4 IND_02: 2018 (2) 380 5.00 4.40 0.737 0.2450 0.0099 0.0320 271.00 3.4 14.4 IND_02: 2019 (1) 2570 10.00 2.00 4.440 1.3500 0.0780 0.1760 1420.00 7.6 32.3 IND_02: 2019 (2) 301 3.00 10.20 1.440 0.8200 0.0260 0.1000 634.00 6.8 9.3 IND_02: 2020 (1) 1040 3.00 5.20 1.410 0.6200 0.0230 0.0590 730.00 7.0 71.8 IND_02: 2020 (2) 225 2.00 4.00 0.810 0.3000 0.0080 0.0300 248.00 6.2 32.3 IND_02: 2021 (1) 508 4.00 9.90 1.230 0.4000 0.0170 0.0560 713.00 6.6 - IND_02: 2021 (2) 438 9.00 12.30 1.470 0.7700 0.0200 0.0830 806.00 6.3 15.4 IND_02: 2022 (1) 270 1.00 3.70 0.630 0.1900 0.0060 0.0280 320.00 7.1 31.7 IND_02: 2022 (2) 1650 9.00 7.40 3.250 1.3100 0.0610 0.1290 539.00 6.6 79.0 IND_02: 2023 (1) - - - - - - - - - - IND_02: 2023 (2) - - - - - - - - - - IND_02: 2024 (1) - - - - - - - - - - IND_02: 2024 (2) - - - - - - - - - - IND_02: 2025 (1) - - - - - - - - - - IND_02: 2025 (2) - - - - - - - - - - IND_02: 2026 (1) - - - - - - - - - - IND_02: 2026 (2) - - - - - - - - - - IND_02 Median 473.0 4.00 6.30 1.425 0.5900 0.0185 0.0580 613.00 6.7 15.4 Evaluation: The MS4 evaluates the data using the following Scoring Matrix (Matrix) and protocol to interpret and communicate the results. The Matrix includes scores ranging from 0 to 4-points, representing a set increase from EPA benchmarks provided in previous MS4 General Permits. 155 SECTION 8.0 - SAMPLING AND EVALUATION PROGRAM 8 Table 8.4.3: Stormwater Reference Site from MDEQ and EPA Site TSS mg/L Oil & Grease mg/L Total Nitro. mg/L Phosp. mg/L Zinc mg/L Lead mg/L Copper mg/L COD mg/L pH Reference 125 10 2 0.4100 0.2100 0.1650 0.0400 80 6 to 9 Example: The TSS Benchmark is 125 mg/L. As such, the 3-Point range is two times that amount (250), the 2-Point range is three times that amount (375), etc. Table 8.4.4: Storm Event Monitoring: Scoring Matrix Parameter 4-Points 3-Points 2-Points 1-Point 0-Points TSS (mg/L) 0 – 125 126 - 250 251 - 375 376 - 500 > 500 Oil and Grease (mg/L) 0 - 10 11 - 20 21 - 30 31 - 40 > 41 Total Nitrogen (mg/L) 0 - 2.0 2.1 - 4.0 4.1 - 6.0 6.1 - 8.0 > 8.0 Phosphorus (mg/L) 0 - .41 .42 - .82 .83 - 1.23 1.24 - 1.65 > 1.65 Zinc (mg/L) 0 - .20 .21 - .40 .41 - .60 .61 - .80 > .80 Lead (mg/L) 0 - .10 .11 - .20 .21-.30 .31 - .40 > .40 Copper(mg/L) 0 - .04 .041 - .08 .081 - .12 .121 - .160 > .160 COD 0 - 80 81 - 160 161 - 240 241 – 320 > 320 pH (High End) 7.6 - 9.0 9.1 - 10.0 10.1 - 11.0 11.1 -12.0 12.1 - 14.0 pH (Low End) 6.0 - 7.5 5.0 - 5.9 4.0 - 4.9 3.0 - 3.9 1.0 - 3.0 The MS4 relates results to the Matrix and then populate the Storm Event Monitoring charts with the corresponding point totals. Example: A 2019 RES_01 sample contained 206 mg/L of TSS. The MS4 assigns and populates the Storm Event Monitoring: RES_01 (2) chart TSS box with 3-points. Table 8.4.5: Storm Event Monitoring: RES_01 Parameter 2019 2020 2021 2022 (1) (2) (1) (2) (1) (2) (1) (2) TSS 0 3 0 4 1 3 2 0 Oil and Grease 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Total Nitrogen 0 2 0 3 0 0 1 0 Phosphorus 0 3 0 3 1 1 1 0 Zinc 0 3 1 4 3 2 3 0 Lead 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Copper 0 4 3 4 3 3 4 1 COD 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 pH 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Event Points: 11 28 16 30 20 21 24 13 Annual Points: 39 46 41 37 156 SECTION 8.0 - SAMPLING AND EVALUATION PROGRAM 9 Table 8.4.6: Storm Event Monitoring: IND_01 Parameter 2019 2020 2021 2022 (1) (2) (1) (2) (1) (2) (1) (2) TSS 0 2 0 2 0 1 3 0 Oil and Grease 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Total Nitrogen 2 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 Phosphorus 0 2 0 2 0 0 3 0 Zinc 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Lead 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 Copper 0 3 0 3 2 0 2 2 COD 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 pH 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Event Points: 14 19 11 21 14 13 24 14 Annual Points: 33 32 27 28 Table 8.4.7: Storm Event Monitoring: RES_02 Parameter 2019 2020 2021 2022 (1) (2) (1) (2) (1) (2) (1) (2) TSS 0 0 0 3 0 2 0 0 Oil and Grease 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Total Nitrogen 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 Phosphorus 0 0 0 3 1 1 1 3 Zinc 2 1 2 3 2 0 3 0 Lead 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Copper 2 2 3 4 3 3 3 2 COD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 pH 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Event Points: 16 15 17 26 18 18 20 16 Annual Points: 31 43 36 36 Table 8.4.8: Storm Event Monitoring: IND_02 Parameter 2019 2020 2021 2022 (1) (2) (1) (2) (1) (2) (1) (2) TSS 0 2 0 3 0 1 2 0 Oil and Grease 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Total Nitrogen 4 0 2 3 0 0 3 1 Phosphorus 0 1 1 3 2 1 3 0 Zinc 0 0 1 3 3 1 4 0 Lead 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Copper 0 2 3 4 3 2 4 1 COD 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 pH 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Event Points: 16 17 19 29 20 17 29 14 Annual Points: 33 48 37 43 157 SECTION 8.0 - SAMPLING AND EVALUATION PROGRAM 10 The MS4 sums the individual scores to obtain an Event Point Total, sums both Event Scores to obtain an Annual Point Total, and calculates a Final Score by transferring and summing the Annual Points in the Stom Event Monitoring: Results chart. Finally, the MS4 divides the Total Points by the Possible Points to calculate the Final Score and transfers the Final Score to SWMP Section 8.8. Table 8.4.9: Storm Event Monitoring: Results Sites 2019 2020 2021 2022 RES_01 Annual Points 39 46 41 37 IND_01 Annual Points 33 32 27 28 RES_02 Annual Points 31 43 36 36 IND_02 Annual Points 33 48 37 43 Total Points: 136 169 141 144 Possible Points: 288 288 288 288 Final Score (decimal): .47 .59 .49 .50 158 SECTION 8.0 - SAMPLING AND EVALUATION PROGRAM 11 Graphic 8.4.10: Urban Runoff Monitoring Map Storm Event Monitoring 159 SECTION 8.0 - SAMPLING AND EVALUATION PROGRAM 12 8.5 In-Stream Wet-Weather Monitoring Introduction: The MS4 conducts semi-annual in-stream wet-weather monitoring on impaired waterbodies to document impacts of urban runoff to Bozeman and Mandeville Creeks. Combined, the Creeks receive urban runoff from over 1,700 acres of dense development at over 100 individual discharge points or outfalls. Non-point source pollution sources exist upstream of the MS4 as identified in the Lower Gallatin Planning Area TMDL. This approach allows the MS4 to take sole responsibility for and mitigate the impacts stemming from urban runoff. Sites: The MS4 monitors two (2) locations on Bozeman Creek and two (2) locations on Mandeville Creek. Each Creek has one (1) station upstream and one (1) downstream of the MS4 boundary. Sample sites include: Site: UPS_01  Location: Bozeman Creek upstream of MS4, near Kagy Blvd.  Latitude, Longitude: 45.657248, -111.028584 Site: DWS_01  Location: Bozeman Creek downstream of MS4, near Gold Ave.  Latitude, Longitude: 45.699668, -111.027347 Site: UPS_02  Location: Mandeville Creek upstream of MS4, near Campus Blvd.  Latitude, Longitude: 45.656506, -111.05803 Site: DWS_02b  Location: Mandeville Creek downstream of MS4, near Frontage Rd.  Latitude, Longitude: 45.712845, -111.055229  Added in 2022 as a replacement for original site DWS_02. Replacement needed due to development. Methods: The MS4 collects in-stream samples using Thermo-Scientific Nalgene Samplers (Sampler). Before rain events, Staff mounts each Sampler to a metal post driven into the creek bed and positions it to collect a sample as soon as the water levels rise from the first flush. The Sampler closes itself and does not allow additional collection or dilution of the original sample once full. Analysis: The MS4 collects, composites, and ships samples to a certified laboratory, which analyzes the parameters identified in SWMP Sec 8.3. The MS4 determines Bozeman Creek’s stream flow using real time data collected from the Bozeman Creek gaging station. The MS4 estimates flow for Mandeville Creek using historical data collected by Gallatin Local Water Quality District, since no permanent gauging station exists. 160 Table 8.5.1: In-Stream Wet-Weather Monitoring Results * Reporting Limit (RL) Site TSS mg/L Oil & Grease mg/L Total Nitro. mg/L Phosp. mg/L Zinc mg/L Lead mg/L Copper mg/L COD mg/L pH UPS_01: 2017 (1) 7 5.80 RL 0.41 0.085 0.0054 0.0005 0.0036 11.6 8.2 UPS_01: 2017 (2) 14 1.00 RL 0.50 RL 0.022 0.0100 RL 0.0010 RL 0.0050 RL 15.0 8.1 UPS_01: 2018 (1) 14 1.00 RL 0.50 RL 0.052 0.0100 RL 0.0010 RL 0.0050 RL 10.0 8.1 UPS_01: 2018 (2) 10 RL 1.00 RL 0.60 0.028 0.0090 0.003 RL 0.0020 RL 5.0 RL 8.3 UPS_01: 2019 (1) 30 7.60 RL 2.79 0.147 0.0505 0.0010 RL 0.0017 9.0 7.7 UPS_01: 2019 (2) 72 1.00 RL 1.60 0.160 0.0300 0.0010 RL 0.0050 RL 5.0 RL 8.2 UPS_01: 2020 (1) 74 1.00 RL 0.50 RL 0.260 0.0200 0.0010 RL 0.0050 RL 26.0 8.1 UPS_01: 2020 (2)* 22 1.00 RL 0.50 RL 0.035 0.0100 RL 0.0010 RL 0.0050 RL 5.0 RL 8.3 UPS_01: 2021 (1) 10 RL 1.00 RL 0.70 0.063 0.0100 RL 0.0010 RL 0.0050 RL 9.0 8.4 UPS_01: 2021 (2) 10 RL 1.00 RL 1.10 0.042 0.0100 RL 0.0010 RL 0.0050 RL 62.0 8.0 UPS_01: 2022 (1) 21.0 1.00 RL 0.50 RL 0.094 0.0100 RL 0.0010 RL 0.0050 RL 25.00 8.0 UPS_01: 2022 (2) 10.0 1.00 RL 1.60 0.026 0.0100 RL 0.0010 RL 0.0050 RL 6.00 8.2 UPS_01: 2023 (1) - - - - - - - - - UPS_01: 2023 (2) - - - - - - - - - UPS_01: 2024 (1) - - - - - - - - - UPS_01: 2024 (2) - - - - - - - - - UPS_01: 2025 (1) - - - - - - - - - UPS_01: 2025 (2) - - - - - - - - - UPS_01: 2026 (1) - - - - - - - - - UPS_01: 2026 (2) - - - - - - - - - UPS_01 Median 14.0 1.00 0.55 0.058 0.0100 0.0010 0.0050 9.50 8.2 UPS_02: 2017 (1) - - - - - - - - - UPS_02: 2017 (2) - - - - - - - - - UPS_02: 2018 (1) 185 1.00 RL 3.10 0.430 0.0330 0.0027 0.0060 49.0 8.2 UPS_02: 2018 (2) 53 1.00 RL 0.50 RL 0.081 0.0180 0.0004 0.0020 16.0 8.1 UPS_02: 2019 (1) 10 6.8 RL 0.74 0.153 0.0422 0.0010 RL 0.0034 6.0 7.9 UPS_02: 2019 (2) 30 1.00 RL 0.80 0.144 0.0300 0.0010 RL 0.0050 RL 5.0 8.1 UPS_02: 2020 (1) 16 1.00 RL 0.80 0.080 0.0100 RL 0.0010 RL 0.0050 RL 11.0 8.3 UPS_02: 2020 (2) 10 RL 1.00 RL 0.60 0.066 0.0200 0.0010 RL 0.0050 RL 5.0 8.4 UPS_02: 2021 (1) 10 RL 1.00 RL 0.80 0.078 0.0100 RL 0.0010 RL 0.0050 RL 23.00 7.8 UPS_02: 2021 (2) 20.0 1.00 RL 1.30 0.224 0.0100 RL 0.0010 RL 0.0050 RL 34.00 7.9 UPS_02: 2022 (1) 11.0 1.00 RL 4.60 0.079 0.0100 RL 0.0010 RL 0.0050 RL 22.00 8.1 UPS_02: 2022 (2)** N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A UPS_02: 2023 (1) - - - - - - - - - UPS_02: 2023 (2) - - - - - - - - - UPS_02: 2024 (1) - - - - - - - - - UPS_02: 2024 (2) - - - - - - - - - UPS_02: 2025 (1) - - - - - - - - - UPS_02: 2025 (2) - - - - - - - - - UPS_02: 2026 (1) - - - - - - - - - UPS_02: 2026 (2) - - - - - - - - - UPS_02: Median 18.0 1.00 0.80 0.113 0.0190 0.0010 0.0050 13.50 8.1 DWS_01: 2017 (1) 10 RL 5.40 RL 0.55 0.088 0.0070 0.0006 0.0036 15.3 8.2 DWS_01: 2017 (2) 134 1.00 RL 1.80 0.264 0.0300 0.0060 0.0060 42.0 8.1 DWS_01: 2018 (1) 34 1.00 RL 0.50 RL 0.082 0.0100 RL 0.0010 RL 0.0005 RL 18.0 8.1 Table 8.5.1: In-Stream Wet-Weather Monitoring Results * Reporting Limit (RL) *: Replacement sample collected on 4/8/21, per MS4 Permit Pat IV.6.b. **: UPS_02: 2022 (2) sample was not collected. The upstream reach of Mandeville Creek was dry during the July 1 – Dec. 31 sampling event timeframe. Adjacent long-term construction dewatering possibly affected flows. 161 SECTION 8.0 - SAMPLING AND EVALUATION PROGRAM 14 Table 8.5.1: In-Stream Wet-Weather Monitoring Results * Reporting Limit (RL) Site TSS mg/L Oil & Grease mg/L Total Nitro. mg/L Phosp. mg/L Zinc mg/L Lead mg/L Copper mg/L COD mg/L pH DWS_01: 2018 (2) 17 1.00 RL 0.70 0.057 0.0220 0.0007 0.0002 RL 14.0 8.3 DWS_01: 2019 (1) 100 7.00 3.00 0.238 0.1100 0.0021 0.0045 13.0 7.9 DWS_01: 2019 (2) 350 1.00 RL 3.40 0.645 0.1400 0.0140 0.0210 94.0 8.2 DWS_01: 2020 (1) 58 1.00 RL 0.50 RL 0.141 0.0300 0.0030 0.0050 28.0 8.2 DWS_01: 2020 (2)* 10 RL 1.00 RL 0.05 RL 0.039 0.0100 RL 0.0010 RL 0.0050 RL 9.0 8.5 DWS_01: 2021 (1) 10 RL 1.00 RL 0.70 0.063 0.0100 RL 0.0010 RL 0.0050 RL 9.0 8.4 DWS_01: 2021 (2) 55 1.00 RL 3.20 0.306 0.0400 0.0200 0.0080 100.0 8.0 DWS_01: 2022 (1) 37.0 1.00 RL 1.10 0.168 0.0200 0.0020 0.0070 31.0 7.8 DWS_01: 2022 (2) 10 RL 1.00 RL 1.60 0.026 0.0100 RL 0.0010 RL 0.0050 RL 6.0 8.2 DWS_01: 2023 (1) - - - - - - - - - DWS_01: 2023 (2) - - - - - - - - - DWS_01: 2024 (1) - - - - - - - - - DWS_01: 2024 (2) - - - - - - - - - DWS_01: 2025 (1) - - - - - - - - - DWS_01: 2025 (2) - - - - - - - - - DWS_01: 2026 (1) - - - - - - - - - DWS_01: 2026 (2) - - - - - - - - - DWS_01: Median 14.0 1.00 0.55 0.058 0.0100 0.0010 0.0050 9.50 8.2 DWS_02: 2017 (1) - - - - - - - - - DWS_02: 2017 (2) - - - - - - - - - DWS_02: 2018 (1) 297 1.00 RL 2.80 0.368 0.0700 0.0168 0.0150 53.0 8.2 DWS_02: 2018 (2) 43 1.00 RL 0.80 0.102 0.0280 0.0026 0.0030 18.0 8.2 DWS_02: 2019 (1) 1180 6.80 3.38 1.340 0.1240 0.0222 0.0173 123.0 8.0 DWS_02: 2019 (2) 84 1.00 RL 2.00 0.235 0.0500 0.0040 0.0050 RL 7.0 8.3 DWS_02: 2020 (1) 190 1.00 RL 2.40 0.365 0.0700 0.0100 RL 0.0130 63.0 8.1 DWS_02: 2020 (2) 68 1.00 RL 2.10 0.191 0.0400 0.0030 0.0080 63.0 8.1 DWS_02: 2021 (1) 19.0 1.00 RL 1.10 0.080 0.0100 RL 0.0010 RL 0.0050 RL 12.0 8.3 DWS_02: 2021 (2) 200 1.00 RL 3.30 0.464 0.0900 0.0100 0.0110 95.0 8.1 DWS_02b: 2022 (1) 29 1.00 RL 1.00 0.103 0.0100 RL 0.0010 RL 0.0050 RL 36.0 8.1 DWS_02b: 2022 (2) 2000 1.00 RL 30.50 2.930 0.4900 0.0740 0.0880 770.0 8.4 DWS_02b: 2023 (1) - - - - - - - - - DWS_02b: 2023 (2) - - - - - - - - - DWS_02b: 2024 (1) - - - - - - - - - DWS_02b: 2024 (2) - - - - - - - - - DWS_02b: 2025 (1) - - - - - - - - - DWS_02b: 2025 (2) - - - - - - - - - DWS_02b: 2026 (1) - - - - - - - - - DWS_02b: 2026 (2) - - - - - - - - - DWS_02 Median 137.0 1.00 2.25 0.300 0.0600 0.0070 0.0095 44.50 8.2 Evaluation: The MS4 analyzes the data using the following Scoring Matrix (Matrix) and protocol to interpret, evaluate, and communicate the results. The Matrix includes scores ranging from 0 to 4-points, representing a set increase from EPA benchmarks provided in previous MS4 General Permits. Example: A percent change of 0-20% equals 4-points, 21-40% equals 3-points, 41-60% equals 2-points, 61-80% equals 1-point, and 81- >100% equals 0-points. *: Replacement sample collected on 4/8/21, per MS4 Permit Pat IV.6.b. 162 SECTION 8.0 - SAMPLING AND EVALUATION PROGRAM 15 Percent change is determined using the following formula: %  = ((Y2 – Y1) / Y1) * 100 Equation 2 For example, TSS: ((200-150)/150) x 100 = 33.3%, resulting in a score of 3-points. Table: 8.5.2: In-Stream Wet-Weather Monitoring: Scoring Matrix Parameter 4-Points 3-Points 2-Points 1-Point 0-Points TSS (% ) (<0) – (20) (21) – (40) (41) – (60) (61) – (80) (81) – (>100) Oil/Grease (% ) (<0) – (20) (21) – (40) (41) – (60) (61) – (80) (81) – (>100) Total Nitrogen (% ) (<0) – (20) (21) – (40) (41) – (60) (61) – (80) (81) – (>100) Phosphorus (% ) (<0) – (20) (21) – (40) (41) – (60) (61) – (80) (81) – (>100) Zinc (% ) (<0) – (20) (21) – (40) (41) – (60) (61) – (80) (81) – (>100) Lead (% ) (<0) – (20) (21) – (40) (41) – (60) (61) – (80) (81) – (>100) Copper (% ) (<0) – (20) (21) – (40) (41) – (60) (61) – (80) (81) – (>100) COD (% ) (<0) – (20) (21) – (40) (41) – (60) (61) – (80) (81) – (>100) pH (% ) (<0) – (20) (21) – (40) (41) – (60) (61) – (80) (81) – (>100) The MS4 relates results to the Matrix and then populates the appropriate In-Stream Wet-Weather Monitoring charts with the corresponding scores. Example: A 2018 Bozeman Creek UPS_01 and DWS_01 TSS percent change equaled 35%. The MS4 assigns and populates the In-Stream Wet-Weather Monitoring: Bozeman Creek UPS_01 and DWS_01 chart TSS box with 3-points. The same approach applies to all sites and parameters. Table 8.5.3: In-Stream Wet-Weather Monitoring: Bozeman Creek UPS_01 and DWS_01 Parameter 2019 2020 2021 2022 (1) (2) (1) (2) (1) (2) (1) (2) TSS 0 0 4 4 4 0 1 4 Oil and Grease 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Total Nitrogen 4 0 4 4 4 0 0 4 Phosphorus 1 0 4 4 4 0 1 1 Zinc 0 0 2 4 4 0 0 4 Lead 0 0 0 4 4 0 0 4 Copper 0 0 4 4 4 2 3 4 COD 2 0 4 1 4 1 3 0 pH 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Event Points: 15 8 30 33 36 11 16 29 Annual Points: 23 63 47 45 163 SECTION 8.0 - SAMPLING AND EVALUATION PROGRAM 16 Table 8.5.4: In-Stream Wet-Weather Monitoring: Mandeville Creek UPS_02 and DWS_02b Parameter 2019 2020 2021 2022 (1) (2) (1) (2) (1) (2) (1) (2)* TSS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Oil and Grease 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Total Nitrogen 0 0 0 0 3 0 4 0 Phosphorus 0 1 0 0 4 0 3 0 Zinc 0 1 0 0 4 0 4 0 Lead 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 0 Copper 0 0 0 2 4 0 4 0 COD 0 3 0 0 4 0 1 0 pH 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Event Points: 8 13 8 10 31 8 28 8 Annual Points: 21 18 39 36 The MS4 sums the individual scores to obtain an Event Point Total, sums both Event Scores to obtain an Annual Point Total, and calculates a Final Score by transferring and summing the Annual Points in the In- Stream Wet-Weather Monitoring: Results chart. Finally, the MS4 divides the Total Points by the Possible Points. The MS4 transfers the Final Score to SWMP Section 8.8. Table 8.5.5: In-Stream Wet-Weather Monitoring: Results Parameter 2019 2020 2021 2022 Bozeman Creek Annual Points 23 63 47 45 Mandeville Creek Annual Points 21 18 39 36 Total Points: 44 81 86 81 Possible Points: 144 144 144 144 Final Score (decimal): .31 .56 .59 .56 *: Event 2 not collected at UPS_02, as Mandeville Creek did not have a documented flow during the July 1 – Dec. 31, 2022 sampling period. UPS_02’s Long-term median used to calculate point total. 164 SECTION 8.0 - SAMPLING AND EVALUATION PROGRAM 17 Graphic 8.5.6: In-Stream Wet-Weather Monitoring Map 165 SECTION 8.0 - SAMPLING AND EVALUATION PROGRAM 18 8.6 Sediment Reduction Monitoring Introduction: The MS4 conducts Sediment Reduction Monitoring to comply with the Montana DEQ’s sediment load reduction requirements detailed in the 2013 Lower Gallatin Planning Area TMDL and to evaluate BMP effectiveness at reducing sediment loads to Bozeman and Mandeville Creeks and the East Gallatin River. The MS4 tracks tons captured in BMPs detailed in SWMP Sections 2.5. Table: 8.6.1: Bozeman Creek Sediment Waste Load Reduction Sediment Source Estimated Load Waste Load Allocation Required Load Reduction Load Reduction MS4 218 tons/year 137 tons/year 37% 81 tons/year **DEQ Imposed** Table 8.6.2: Mandeville Creek Sediment Waste Load Reduction Sediment Source Estimated Load Waste Load Allocation Required Load Reduction Load Reduction MS4 None None None 10 tons/year **Self Imposed** Sites: Stormwater treatment units described in SWMP Section 2.5. Methods: Measurement process described in SWMP Section 2.5. Analysis: The MS4 analyzes the following parameter:  Total Sediment Captured (tons) Evaluation: The MS4 enters data into a local spreadsheet for safe record upon receipt. Further, the MS4 incorporates the data into the following Scoring Matrix (Matrix) to interpret, evaluate, and communicate the results. The Matrix includes scores ranging from 0 to 4-points, which relate to total annual sediment capture. For example, a load reduction for Bozeman Creek of ≥ 81 tons equals 4-points, 60 – 80 tons equals 3-points, 40 – 59 tons equals 2-points, 20 – 39 tons equals 1-point, and 0 – 19 equals 0-points. Table 8.6.3: Sediment Reduction Monitoring: Scoring Matrix (Bozeman Creek) Parameter 4-Points 3-Points 2-Points 1-Point 0-Points Sediment Captured (tons) ≥81 60 – 80 40 – 59 20 – 39 0 – 19 Table 8.6.4: Sediment Reduction Monitoring: Scoring Matrix (Mandeville Creek) Parameter 4-Points 3-Points 2-Points 1-Point 0-Points Sediment Captured (tons) ≥10 7.5 – 9.9 5.0 – 7.4 2.5 – 4.9 0 – 2.4 Results: The MS4 relates results to the Matrix and then populate the Sediment Reduction Monitoring: Results chart with the corresponding scores. The MS4 weighs Bozeman Creek more heavily than Mandeville Creek because of DEQ’s imposed reduction requirements. Table 8.6.5 Sediment Reduction Totals Waterbody 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Bozeman Creek 45 Tons 45 Tons 41 Tons 50 Tons 43 Tons Mandeville Creek 1 Ton 6 Tons 8 Tons 6 Tons 6 Tons Total: 46 Tons 51 Tons 49 Tons 56 Tons 49 Tons 166 SECTION 8.0 - SAMPLING AND EVALUATION PROGRAM 19 The MS4 calculates a Final Score by summing the weighted Annual Points in the Sediment Reduction Monitoring: Results chart and dividing by the Possible Points to calculate the Final Score. Finally, the MS4 transfers the Final Score to SWMP Section 8.8. Table 8.6.5: Sediment Reduction Monitoring: Results Waterway 2019 2020 2021 2022 Bozeman Creek Annual Points (2) x (1.5) = 3 (2) x (1.5) = 3 (2) x (1.5) = 3 (2) x (1.5) = 3 Mandeville Creek Annual Points (2) x (.5) = 1 (3 )x (.5) = 1.5 (2) x (.5) = 1 (2) x (.5) = 1 Total Points: 4 4.5 4 4 Possible Points: 8 8 8 8 Final Score (decimal): 0.50 0.56 0.50 0.50 8.7 Long-Term Trend Monitoring Introduction: Aquatic macroinvertebrate assemblages respond predictably to sedimentation by shifting from sediment-intolerant to sediment-tolerant taxa. Changes in macroinvertebrate assemblages are quantified using the Observed:Expected (O:E) ratio biological index model, which compares the observed taxa at a site with the expected taxa that would be present at a site under a variety of environmental conditions. Using the percent difference in O:E ratios between upstream and downstream sites the MS4 is able to assess stormwater discharge impacts to macroinvertebrate assemblages. A positive percent difference in O:E ratios indicate that stormwater discharges are not negatively impacting macroinvertebrate community assemblages. Conversely, negative percent differences in O:E ratios indicate that stormwater discharges are negatively impacting macroinvertebrate community assemblies. Sedimentation affects macroinvertebrates community assemblages by:  Filling interstitial voids in gravel substrate  Reducing gravel attachment sites  Altering stream morphology  Increasing stream temperature Site: The MS4 monitors benthic macroinvertebrates in Bozeman at the In-Stream Wet-Weather Monitoring Sites (SWMP Section 8.5). The MS4 ceased macroinvertebrate monitoring at the Mandeville Creek upstream and downstream locations due to no observed flow at UPS_02 and site constraints at the new DWS_02b site. Methods: The MS4 derives macroinvertebrate biological index monitoring protocols from MDEQ Sample Collection, Sorting, and Taxonomic Identification of Benthic Macroinvertebrate Communities Standard Operating Procedures (one sample taken per location per year). Analysis: The MS4 collects and preserves macroinvertebrate samples and then delivers to an accredited lab, which completes the analysis of the following parameters:  Taxonomic Sorting and Identification  Species Abundance  Species Diversity  Observed / Expected Ratios  Percentage of Sediment Tolerant Species Upon receiving macroinvertebrate analysis results, the MS4 enters the calculated O:E ratios in the table below and then calculates the percent change between upstream and downstream sites. 167 SECTION 8.0 - SAMPLING AND EVALUATION PROGRAM 20 Graphic 8.7.1: Monitoring Results: UPS_01 & DWS_01 Year O:E Ratio: UPS_01 O:E Ratio: DWS_01 O:E Ratio (% ) 2018 0.20 0.37 +85% 2019 0.33 0.20 -39% 2020 0.29 0.33 +14% 2021 0.84 0.76 -10% 2022* 0.42 0.42 0% *: O:E data not available at time of publication. 2022 O:E Ratios is a calculated mean from years 2018 – 2021. Table 8.7.2: Monitoring Results: UPS_02 & DWS_02 Year O:E Ratio: UPS_02 O:E Ratio: DWS_02 O:E Ratio (% ) 2018 0.29 0.16 -45% 2019 0.29 0.25 -14% 2020 0.12 0.20 +67% 2021 0.41 0.28 -32% 2022* - - - *: Mandeville Creek macroinvertebrate monitoring abandoned in 2022 due to no observed flow at UPS_02 and site constraints and new monitoring location DWS_02b. Evaluation: The MS4 enters data into a local spreadsheet and stores analysis reports for a safe record upon receipt. Further, the MS4 analyzes the data using the following Scoring Matrix and protocol to interpret, evaluate, and communicate the results. The Scoring Matrix includes scores from 0 to 4-points, which relate to percent change in O:E ratios between the upstream and downstream sites for Bozeman creek. Example: An O:E ratio percent change of 0-(-20%) equals 4-points,- 21-(-40%) equals 3-points,- 41-(-60%) equals 2- points, -61-(-80%) equals 1-point, and >-80% equals 0-points. Percent change is determined using Equation 2 found in SWMP Section 8.3. Example: An upstream Bozeman Creek sample has an O:E ratio of 1.1, and the downstream sample has an O:E ratio of 0.8. The MS4 finds the difference and divides by the original to arrive at a percentage ((0.8 - 1.1)/1.1) x 100 = -30%, resulting in a score of 3-points. Table 8.7.3: Long-Term Trend Monitoring: Scoring Matrix O:E Ratio 4-Points 3-Points 2-Points 1-Point 0-Points O:E Ratio (% ) >0 – (-20) -21 – (-40) -41 – (-60) -61 – (-80) -81 – (-100) The MS4 relates results to the Matrix and then populates the Long-Term Trend Monitoring: Results chart with the corresponding scores, and calculates a Final Score by summing the Event Points in the Long-Term Trend Monitoring: Results chart and dividing by the Possible Points. Finally, the MS4 transfers the Final Score to SWMP Section 8.8. Table 8.7.4: Long-Term Trend Monitoring: Results Waterway 2019 2020 2021 2022 Bozeman Creek Event Points 4 3 4 4 Mandeville Creek Event Points 2 4 4 - Total Points: 6 7 8 4 Possible Points: 8 8 8 4 Final Score (decimal): .75 0.88 1.0 1.0 168 SECTION 8.0 - SAMPLING AND EVALUATION PROGRAM 21 8.8 Evaluation The MS4 calculates a Final Grade to determine the overall effectiveness of its programs and initiatives detailed in SWMP Section 1.0 to 7.0 by transferring scores from each protocol (SWMP Sections 8.4 - 8.7) to the Programmatic Evaluation: Final Points chart, and utilizes a weighted sum calculation to make the four scores comparable. Table 8.8.1: Programmatic Evaluation: Final Points (2018) Evaluation Type Final Scores Weight Weighted Total Weighted Total (%) Storm Event Monitoring .62 .25 .15 15.5% In-Stream Wet-Weather Monitoring .63 .25 .16 16.0% Sediment Reduction Monitoring .38 .25 .10 10.0% Stream Health Monitoring .75 .25 .19 19.0% Final Weighted Total (%): 60.5% Table 8.8.2: Programmatic Evaluation: Final Points (2019) Evaluation Type Final Scores Weight Weighted Total Weighted Total (%) Storm Event Monitoring 0.47 .25 0.1175 11.75% In-Stream Wet-Weather Monitoring 0.31 .25 0.0775 7.75% Sediment Reduction Monitoring 0.50 .25 0.1250 12.50% Stream Health Monitoring 0.88 .25 0.2200 22.00% Final Weighted Total (%): 54.0% Table 8.8.3: Programmatic Evaluation: Final Points (2020) Evaluation Type Final Scores Weight Weighted Total Weighted Total (%) Storm Event Monitoring 0.59 .25 0.1475 14.75% In-Stream Wet-Weather Monitoring 0.56 .25 0.1406 14.06% Sediment Reduction Monitoring 0.56 .25 0.1400 14.00% Stream Health Monitoring 1.0 .25 0.2500 25.00% Final Weighted Total (%): 67.8% Table 8.8.4: Programmatic Evaluation: Final Points (2021) Evaluation Type Final Scores Weight Weighted Total Weighted Total (%) Storm Event Monitoring 0.49 .25 0.1225 12.25 In-Stream Wet-Weather Monitoring 0.59 .25 0.1475 14.75 Sediment Reduction Monitoring 0.50 .25 0.1250 12.50 Stream Health Monitoring 0.88 .25 0.2200 22.00 Final Weighted Total (%): 61.5 169 SECTION 8.0 - SAMPLING AND EVALUATION PROGRAM 22 Table 8.8.5: Programmatic Evaluation: Final Points (2022) Evaluation Type Final Scores Weight Weighted Total Weighted Total (%) Storm Event Monitoring 0.50 .25 0.1250 12.50 In-Stream Wet-Weather Monitoring 0.56 .25 0.1400 14.00 Sediment Reduction Monitoring 0.50 .25 0.1250 12.50 Stream Health Monitoring 1.0 .25 0.2500 25.00 Final Weighted Total (%): 64.0% The MS4 relates the Final Weighted Total (%) to the following equally distributed ranges (100-percent scale) and their associated Final Grades, and populates the Stormwater Report Card with a Final Grade for the corresponding year. The 2021 score cannot be calculated definitively without receiving the macroinvertebrate results, but is expected to be near a 63%. Table 8.8.5: Grading Matrix Grade A B C D F Score (%) 90 - 100% 80 - 89% 70 - 79% 60 - 69% 0 - 59% Table 8.8.6: Stormwater Report Card 2019 Final Grade 2020 Final Grade 2021 Final Grade 2022 Final Grade F 54% D 68% D 62% D 64% The MS4 utilizes its empirical knowledge, performance measures, and data to continually evaluate and optimize its programmatic workloads detailed in this SWMP. Also, the MS4 compares its Final Grades to the criteria below and, as necessary, works to implement the following improvement strategies: Grade = A: No stormwater impact on receiving waters, allowing for a continuation of administrative programs and reduction of TMDL Action Plan investment to maintain grade. Grade = B: Low stormwater impact to receiving waters, requiring continuation of administrative programs and TMDL Action Plan investment to increase grade. Grade = C: Moderate stormwater impact on receiving waters, requiring an expansion of administrative programs and continuation of TMDL Action Plan investment to increase grade. Grade = D: Significant stormwater impact on receiving waters, requiring an expansion of administrative programs and TMDL Action Plan investment to increase grade. Grade = F: Major stormwater impact on receiving waters, reassessment of administrative programs and TMDL Action Plan investment strategy required. 170 SECTION 8.0 - SAMPLING AND EVALUATION PROGRAM 23 Blank Page 171 Section 9.0 Stormwater Management Plan Updates Graphic: 9.0.1: Permeable Paver WalkwayGraphic 9.0.2: Boulevard Infiltration Gallery172 SECTION 9.0 – STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN UPDATES 2 Blank Page 173 SECTION 9.0 – STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN UPDATES 3 Introduction The MS4 updates the information in this SWMP annually, and tracks change specific to each section. This SWMP requires changes to meet operation and policy adjustments that occur in local government. 9.1 Program Administration January/February 2021:  Sections 1.1-1.10: Streamlined sections, removed excess language, reformatted duplicate information into charts, and corrected grammatical errors.  Section 1.1: Added puctuation and removed language referencing “Master Plan”.  Section 1.2: Completed minor grammar updates and clarified language.  Section 1.2: Removed language regarding an MOU requirement between the City and MSU.  Section 1.3: Updated the 20 total impervious area and total site plan performance measure.  Section 1.3: Added the FY21 Approved Budget information.  Section 1.3: Updated Graphic 1.3.1 and 1.3.2.  Section 1.3: Added Graphics 1.3.3 -1.3.6.  Section 1.3: Removed excess language, clarified content, and reformatted.  Section 1.4: Added the FY21 Approved Budget information.  Section 1.4: Removed excess language, clarified content, and reformatted.  Section 1.5: Updated and clarified language for all positions.  Section 1.5: Updated Graphic 1.5.1 to include 2020 numbers, recalculated totals.  Section 1.6: Completed minor language edits.  Section 1.7: Updated section title and completed wording edits.  Section 1.8: Removed two permit references.  Section 1.10: Updated 2021 SWMP advertisement dates, and updated Graphic 1.10.1. January/February 2022:  Section 1.2: Updated population numbers with 2020 census data and enrollment data  Section 1.3: Updated rate model information  1.4: Updated MSU regulated projects  1.5 Updated org charts to include points of contact between the co-permitees and roles related to each MCM. January/February 2023:  Throughout: Removed the oldest years of data. Where appropriate, older data is provided as an average of the removed years in the first column in a table.  Section 1.3: Updated impervious area, site plans, staffing and budget summaries for the past year.  1.5: Updated titles in the COB org chart 9.2 Capital Project Program January/February 2021:  Sections 2.1-2.6: Streamlined sections, removed excess language, reformatted duplicate information into charts, and corrected grammatical errors. 174 SECTION 9.0 – STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN UPDATES 4  Section 2.2: Revised the Total Maximum Daily Load Action Plan.  Section 2.3: Updated performance metrics and projects.  Section 2.4: Updated projects and graphics, and clarified some names and categories.  Section 2.5: Updated pollutant reduction totals.  Section 2.6: Updated performance measures. January/February 2022:  Sections 2.1-2.6: Update tables to include 2021 data, including the CIP budget in an easier-to- read table format. 9.3 Public Education Program January/February 2021:  Sections 3.1-3.4: Streamlined sections, removed excess language, reformatted duplicate information into charts, and corrected grammatical errors.  Section 3.3: Improved formatting.  Section 3.4: Updated intiative information. January/February 2022:  Sections 3.1-3.4: Fixed formatting and updated tables.  Section 3.4: Included adopt a rain garden program January/February 2023:  Removed “Goals” and “Goal Outcome” and replaced with Performance Measure for all tables.  Updated all tables with 2022 results. 9.4 Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Program January/February 2021:  Sections 4.1-4.8: Streamlined sections, removed excess language, reformatted duplicate information into charts, and corrected grammatical errors.  Section 4.3: Changed Response Protocol to Corrective Action Plan. Expanded and added detail to contained sections to provide additional detail regarding the MS4’s process.  Section 4.4: Improved language related to the MS4’s Enforcement Response Plan.  Section 4.5: Added 2020 events and updated Graphics  Section 4.6: Updated controls for hot tub and pool discharge and remove construction dewatering, which is covered under SWMP Section 5.0.  Section 4.7: Updated graphics provided more information regarding the MS4’s ORI Inspection Plan, and updated high-priority outfall inspection information.  Section 4.8: Updated storm sewer infrastructure totals. June 2021:  Section 4.5: Updated 2021 IDDE events  Section 4.5, 4.7: Updated maps January 2023:  Section 4.5: Updated 2022 IDDE events 175 SECTION 9.0 – STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN UPDATES 5  Section 4.5, 4.7: Updated maps  Section 4.7: Updated Table 4.7.1: Receiving Waterways  Section 4.7: Added Outfall Attribute update information  Section 4.7: Updated High-Priority Outfalls tables and Outfall Inspection Summary table.  Section 4.8: Removed table 4.8.5 9.5 Construction Site Management Program January/February 2021:  Sections 5.1-5.8: Streamlined sections, removed excess language, reformatted duplicate information into charts, and corrected grammatical errors.  Section 5.3: Updated to be specific to the MS4’s permitting program and account for operational changes made during 2020.  Section 5.4: Added section to better aling with the requirments of the MS4 Permit, including a flow chart and description of the MS4’s enforcement process.  Section 5.5: Added section to include more detailed information regarding high-priority sites and rain events, added 2020 totals, reformatted tables, and updated Graphic.  Section 5.6: Added 2020 performance totals and audit results and updated the chart.  Section 5.8: Updated document names. January/February 2022:  Section 5.5: Updated construction site inventory  Section 5.6: Updated performance measures with 2021 audit scores and discussion  Section 5.7: Added Notice of Violations, Stop Work Order to program document list January 2023:  Section 5.5: Updated construction site inventory  Section 5.6: Updated performance measures with 2022 audit scores and discussion 9.6 Post-Construction Program January/February 2021:  Sections 6.1-6.9: Streamlined sections, removed excess language, reformatted duplicate information into charts, and corrected grammatical errors.  Sections 6.1-6.9: Revised the entire section to account for programmatic changes and improve alignment with the MS4 Permit. January/February 2022:  Section 6.4: Updated structural BMP inventory tables  Section 6.6: Updated High-priority list and noted sites that were evaluated and found not to meet the criteria  Section 6.8: Included 2021 audit data in performance evaluation January/February 2023:  Section 6.4: Updated structural BMP inventory tables  Section 6.6: Updated High-priority list and noted sites that were evaluated and found not to meet the criteria 176 SECTION 9.0 – STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN UPDATES 6  Section 6.8: Included 2022 audit data in performance evaluation 9.7 Good Housekeeping Program January/February 2021:  Sections 7.1-7.5: Streamlined section, removed excess language, reformatted duplicate information into charts, and corrected grammatical errors.  Section 7.2: Adjusted infrastructure maintenance frequencies and updated performance totals.  Section 7.3: Modified Facility Minimum Standards, updated Facility Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan protocols, added tables and updated map, and removed performance metric.  Section 7.4: Modified Activity Minimum Standards, updated Activity Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan protocols, and removed completion performance metric.  Section 7.5: Developed training section to include tables and updated strategies, updated participation numbers, and updated training events. January/February 2022:  Section 7.2-7.4: Added 2021 quantitative data to tables, list of activity and facility SWPPPs to include the creation of new documents as planned by each year.  Section 7.5: Added 2021 training. Consolidated some bullets based on staffing changes. Next year, further consolidation will occur by position rather than individual due to promotion, staff turnover etc. January 2023:  Section 7.3: Condensed SWMT Training into one section.  Section 7.3: Condensed Construction Site Personnel Training into one section.  Section 7.3: Condensed Post-Construction Personnel Training into one section.  Section 7.3: Condensed Field and Facility Personnel Training into one section.  Section 7.3: Added Conferences and Miscelaneous Trainings section.  Section 7.5: Added 2021 training. Consolidated some bullets based on staffing changes.  Section 7.4: Removed Laurel Glen, Cemetery Shops, bozeman Public Safety Center, City Hall, and Fire Stations 1 – 3 from MS4 Facilities. Added justification for removal.  Section 7.4: Updated FSWPPP Map.  Section 7.6: Condensed ASWPPP Training section. 9.8 Sampling and Evaluation Program January/February 2021:  Sections 8.1-8.9: Streamlined section, removed excess language, reformatted duplicate information into charts, and corrected grammatical errors.  Section 8.4: Added 2020 raw data and updated point scores.  Section 8.5: Added 2020 raw data and updated point scores.  Section 8.6: Added 2020 raw data and updated point scores.  Section 8.7: Added 2020 raw data and updated point scores.  Section 8.8: Calculated 2020 score and updated Graphic 8.8.5.  Section 8.9: Added 2020 Results. 177 SECTION 9.0 – STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN UPDATES 7 April 2021:  Sections 8.1-8.9: Updated UPS_1 and DWS_01 data with replacement sample data. June/July 2021:  Section 8.4: Added Spring 2021 raw data and updated point scores. January/February 2022:  Sections 8.1-8.9: Updated tables and discussion with all available quantitative data collected in 2021. January 2023:  Sections 8.1-8.9: Updated tables and discussion with all available quantitative data collected in 2022.  Section 8.5: Updated site descriptions and added new DWS_02b site description and In-stream monitoring map. 178 SECTION 9.0 – STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN UPDATES 8 Blank Page 179 Memorandum REPORT TO:City Commission FROM:Melissa Hodnett, Finance Director John Alston, Utility Director SUBJECT:Authorize the City Manager to Sign a Professional Services Agreement with Advanced Engineering and Environmental Services, LLC (AE2S) for Water and Wastewater Revenue Adequacy Modeling MEETING DATE:February 14, 2023 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Agreement - Vendor/Contract RECOMMENDATION:Authorize the City Manager to Sign a Professional Services Agreement with Advanced Engineering and Environmental Services, LLC for Water and Wastewater Revenue Adequacy Modeling. STRATEGIC PLAN:7.5. Funding and Delivery of City Services: Use equitable and sustainable sources of funding for appropriate City services, and deliver them in a lean and efficient manner. BACKGROUND: The most recent rate study for Water and Wastewater services was performed in 2018 by Advanced Engineering and Environmental Services, LLC (AE2S) and presented to the Commission on August 20, 2018. As part of the study, AE2S created Revenue Adequacy Models for the Water and Wastewater Funds. Rates for both funds were adopted for two years initially in September 2018. AE2S assisted with model updates most recently in 2021, and rates were adopted in September 2021 through fiscal year 2023. This professional services agreement includes updates to the Revenue Adequacy Models for the Water and Wastewater Funds to incorporate updated information, including the 2024-2028 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) most recently adopted by Commission in December 2022. The updates will also include latest operating cost estimates and updated fund balances. Revenue increases needed to support operating, capital and debt service expenditures and reserve requirements will be calculated and presented to the City Commission within the fiscal year (FY) 2024 budget development process. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None 180 ALTERNATIVES:The Commission could adopt rates based on the 2021 rate study, which is not recommended as we will not know whether that revenue is adequate to support the adopted CIP or FY2024 budget. FISCAL EFFECTS:The contract amount will be paid for using the Water Fund and Wastewater Fund 2023 adopted budgets. Attachments: PSA AE2S Rate Consulting.docx Exhibit A-AE2S Rate Study Update.pdf Report compiled on: January 11, 2023 181 Professional Services Agreement for 2023 Water and Wastewater Utility Rate Model Updates Page 1 of 11 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this 5th day of January , 20223 (“Effective Date”), by and between the CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA,a self-governing municipal corporation organized and existing under its Charter and the laws of the State of Montana, 121 North Rouse Street, Bozeman, Montana, with a mailing address of PO Box 1230, Bozeman, MT 59771, hereinafter referred to as “City,” and, Advanced Engineering and Environmental Services, LLC, 4050 Garden View Drive, Grand Forks, ND, 58201, hereinafter referred to as “Contractor.” The City and Contractor may be referred to individually as “Party” and collectively as “Parties.” In consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements herein contained, the receipt and sufficiency whereof being hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1.Purpose: City agrees to enter this Agreement with Contractor to perform for City services described in the Scope of Services attached hereto as Exhibit A and by this reference made a part hereof. 2.Term/Effective Date: This Agreement is effective upon the Effective Date unless earlier terminated in accordance with this Agreement. 3.Scope of Services: Contractor will perform the work and provide the services in accordance with the requirements of the Scope of Services. For conflicts between this Agreement and the Scope of Services, unless specifically provided otherwise, the Agreement governs. 4.Payment: City agrees to pay Contractor up to the amount specified in the Scope of Services attached hereto as Exhibit A. Any alteration or deviation from the described services that involves additional costs above the Agreement amount will be performed by Contractor after written request by the City, and will become an additional charge over and above the amount listed in the Scope of Services. The City must agree in writing upon any additional charges. 5. Contractor’s Representations: To induce City to enter into this Agreement, Contractor makes the following representations: a.Contractor has familiarized itself with the nature and extent of this Agreement, the Scope of Services, and with all local conditions and federal, state and local laws, ordinances, rules, 182 Professional Services Agreement for 2023 Water and Wastewater Utility Rate Model Updates Page 2 of 11 and regulations that in any manner may affect cost, progress or performance of the Scope of Services. b.Contractor represents and warrants to City that it has the experience and ability to perform the services required by this Agreement; that it will perform the services in a professional, competent and timely manner and with diligence and skill; that it has the power to enter into and perform this Agreement and grant the rights granted in it; and that its performance of this Agreement shall not infringe upon or violate the rights of any third party, whether rights of copyright, trademark, privacy, publicity, libel, slander or any other rights of any nature whatsoever, or violate any federal, state and municipal laws. The City will not determine or exercise control as to general procedures or formats necessary to have these services meet this warranty. 6.Independent Contractor Status/Labor Relations: The parties agree that Contractor is an independent contractor for purposes of this Agreement and is not to be considered an employee of the City for any purpose. Contractor is not subject to the terms and provisions of the City’s personnel policies handbook and may not be considered a City employee for workers’ compensation or any other purpose. Contractor is not authorized to represent the City or otherwise bind the City in any dealings between Contractor and any third parties. Contractor shall comply with the applicable requirements of the Workers’ Compensation Act, Title 39, Chapter 71, Montana Code Annotated (MCA), and the Occupational Disease Act of Montana, Title 39, Chapter 71, MCA. Contractor shall maintain workers’ compensation coverage for all members and employees of Contractor’s business, except for those members who are exempted by law. Contractor shall furnish the City with copies showing one of the following: (1) a binder for workers’ compensation coverage by an insurer licensed and authorized to provide workers’ compensation insurance in the State of Montana; or (2) proof of exemption from workers’ compensation granted by law for independent contractors. In the event that, during the term of this Agreement, any labor problems or disputes of any type arise or materialize which in turn cause any services to cease for any period of time, Contractor specifically agrees to take immediate steps, at its own expense and without expectation of reimbursement from City, to alleviate or resolve all such labor problems or disputes. The specific steps Contractor shall take shall be left to the discretion of Contractor; provided, however, that Contractor shall bear all costs of any related legal action. Contractor shall provide immediate relief to the City so as to permit the services to continue at no additional cost to City. Contractor shall indemnify, defend, and hold the City harmless from any and all claims, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and liabilities arising out of, resulting from, or occurring in 183 Professional Services Agreement for 2023 Water and Wastewater Utility Rate Model Updates Page 3 of 11 connection with any labor problems or disputes or any delays or stoppages of work associated with such problems or disputes. 7.Indemnity/Waiver of Claims/Insurance: For other than professional services rendered, to the fullest extent permitted by law, Contractor agrees to release, defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its agents, representatives, employees, and officers (collectively referred to for purposes of this Section as the City) from and against any and all claims, demands, actions, fees and costs (including attorney’s fees and the costs and fees of expert witness and consultants), losses, expenses, liabilities (including liability where activity is inherently or intrinsically dangerous) or damages of whatever kind or nature connected therewith and without limit and without regard to the cause or causes thereof or the negligence of any party or parties that may be asserted against, recovered from or suffered by the City occasioned by, growing or arising out of or resulting from or in any way related to: (i) the negligent, reckless, or intentional misconduct of the Contractor; or (ii) any negligent, reckless, or intentional misconduct of any of the Contractor’s agents. For the professional services rendered, to the fullest extent permitted by law, Contractor agrees to indemnify and hold the City harmless against claims, demands, suits, damages, losses, and expenses, including reasonable defense attorney fees, to the extent caused by the negligence or intentional misconduct of the Contractor or Contractor’s agents or employees. Such obligationsshall not be construed to negate, abridge, or reduce other rights or obligations of indemnity that would otherwise exist. The indemnification obligations of this Section must not be construed to negate, abridge, or reduce any common-law or statutory rights of the City as indemnitee(s) which would otherwise exist as to such indemnitee(s). Contractor’s indemnity under this Section shall be without regard to and without any right to contribution from any insurance maintained by City. Should the City be required to bring an action against the Contractor to assert its right to defense or indemnification under this Agreement or under the Contractor’s applicable insurance policies required below, the City shall be entitled to recover reasonable costs and attorney fees incurred in asserting its right to indemnification or defense but only if a court of competent jurisdiction determines the Contractor was obligated to defend the claim(s) or was obligated to indemnify the City for a claim(s) or any portion(s) thereof. In the event of an action filed against the City resulting from the City’s performance under this Agreement, the City may elect to represent itself and incur all costs and expenses of suit. Contractor also waives any and all claims and recourse against the City, including the right of 184 Professional Services Agreement for 2023 Water and Wastewater Utility Rate Model Updates Page 4 of 11 contribution for loss or damage to person or property arising from, growing out of, or in any way connected with or incident to the performance of this Agreement except “responsibility for [City’s] own fraud, for willful injury to the person or property of another, or for violation of law, whether willful or negligent” as per 28-2-702, MCA. These obligations shall survive termination of this Agreement and the services performed hereunder. In addition to and independent from the above, Contractorshall at Contractor’s expense secure insurance coverage through an insurance company or companies duly licensed and authorized to conduct insurance business in Montana which insures the liabilities and obligations specifically assumed by the Contractor in this Section. The insurance coverage shall not contain any exclusion for liabilities specifically assumed by the Contractor in this Section. The insurance shall cover and apply to all claims, demands, suits, damages, losses, and expenses that may be asserted or claimed against, recovered from, or suffered by the City without limit and without regard to the cause therefore and which is acceptable to the City. Contractor shall furnish to the City an accompanying certificate of insurance and accompanying endorsements in amounts not less than as follows: Workers’ Compensation – statutory; Employers’ Liability - $1,000,000 per occurrence; $2,000,000 annual aggregate; Commercial General Liability - $1,000,000 per occurrence; $2,000,000 annual aggregate; Automobile Liability - $1,000,000 property damage/bodily injury per accident; and Professional Liability - $1,000,000 per claim; $2,000,000 annual aggregate. The above amounts shall be exclusive of defense costs. The City shall be endorsed as an additional or named insured on a primary non-contributory basis on the Commercial General, , and Automobile Liability policies. The insurance and required endorsements must be in a form suitable to City and shall include no less than a thirty (30) day notice of cancellation or non-renewal. Contractor shall notify City within two (2) business days of Contractor’s receipt of notice that any required insurance coverage will be terminated or Contractor’s decision to terminate any required insurance coverage for any reason. The City must approve all insurance coverage and endorsements prior to the Contractor commencing work. 8.Termination for Contractor’s Fault: 185 Professional Services Agreement for 2023 Water and Wastewater Utility Rate Model Updates Page 5 of 11 a.If Contractor refuses or fails to timely do the work, or any part thereof, or fails to perform any of its obligations under this Agreement, or otherwise breaches any terms or conditions of this Agreement, the City may, by written notice, terminate this Agreement and the Contractor’s right to proceed with all or any part of the work (“Termination Notice Due to Contractor’s Fault”). The City may then take over the work and complete it, either with its own resources or by re-letting the contract to any other third party. b.In the event of a termination pursuant to this Section 8, Contractor shall be entitled to payment only for those services Contractor actually rendered. c.Any termination provided for by this Section 8 shall be in addition to any other remedies to which the City may be entitled under the law or at equity. d.In the event of termination under this Section 8, Contractor shall, under no circumstances, be entitled to claim or recover consequential, special, punitive, lost business opportunity, lost productivity, field office overhead, general conditions costs, or lost profits damages of any nature arising, or claimed to have arisen, as a result of the termination. 9.Termination for City’s Convenience: a.Should conditions arise which, in the sole opinion and discretion of the City, make it advisable to the City to cease performance under this Agreement, the City may terminate this Agreement by written notice to Contractor (“Notice of Termination for City’s Convenience”). The termination shall be effective in the manner specified in the Notice of Termination for City’s Convenience and shall be without prejudice to any claims that the City may otherwise have against Contractor. b.Upon receipt of the Notice of Termination for City’s Convenience, unless otherwise directed in the Notice, the Contractor shall immediately cease performance under this Agreement and make every reasonable effort to refrain from continuing work, incurring additional expenses or costs under this Agreement and shall immediately cancel all existing orders or contracts upon terms satisfactory to the City. Contractor shall do only such work as may be necessary to preserve, protect, and maintain work already completed or immediately in progress. c.In the event of a termination pursuant to this Section 9, Contractor is entitled to payment only for those services Contractor actually rendered on or before the receipt of the Notice of Termination for City’s Convenience. 186 Professional Services Agreement for 2023 Water and Wastewater Utility Rate Model Updates Page 6 of 11 d.The compensation described in Section 9(c) is the sole compensation due to Contractor for its performance of this Agreement. Contractor shall, under no circumstances, be entitled to claim or recover consequential, special, punitive, lost business opportunity, lost productivity, field office overhead, general conditions costs, or lost profits damages of any nature arising, or claimed to have arisen, as a result of the termination. 10.Limitation on Contractor’s Damages; Time for Asserting Claim: a.In the event of a claim for damages by Contractor under this Agreement, Contractor’s damages shall be limited to contract damages and Contractor hereby expressly waives any right to claim or recover consequential, special, punitive, lost business opportunity, lost productivity, field office overhead, general conditions costs, or lost profits damages of any nature or kind. b.In the event Contractor wants to assert a claim for damages of any kind or nature, Contractor shall provide City with written notice of its claim, the facts and circumstances surrounding and giving rise to the claim, and the total amount of damages sought by the claim, within thirty (30) days of the facts and circumstances giving rise to the claim. In the event Contractor fails to provide such notice, Contractor shall waive all rights to assert such claim. 11.Representatives and Notices: a.City’s Representative: The City’s Representative for the purpose of this Agreement shall be Melissa Hodnett, Finance Director or such other individual as City shall designate in writing. Whenever approval or authorization from or communication or submission to City is required by this Agreement, such communication or submission shall be directed to the City’s Representative and approvals or authorizations shall be issued only by such Representative; provided, however, that in exigent circumstances when City’s Representative is not available, Contractor may direct its communication or submission to other designated City personnel or agents as designated by the City in writingand may receive approvals or authorization from such persons. b.Contractor’s Representative: The Contractor’s Representative for the purpose of this Agreement shall be Miranda Kleven or such other individual as Contractor shall designate in writing. Whenever direction to or communication with Contractor is required by this Agreement, such direction or communication shall be directed to Contractor’s Representative; provided, however, that in exigent circumstances when Contractor’s Representative is not available, City may direct its direction or communication to other 187 Professional Services Agreement for 2023 Water and Wastewater Utility Rate Model Updates Page 7 of 11 designated Contractor personnel or agents. c.Notices:All notices required by this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be provided to the Representatives named in this Section. Notices shall be deemed given when delivered, if delivered by courier to Party’s address shown above during normal business hours of the recipient; or when sent, if sent by email or fax (with a successful transmission report) to the email address or fax number provided by the Party’s Representative; or on the fifth business day following mailing, if mailed by ordinary mail to the address shown above, postage prepaid. 12.Permits: Contractor shall provide all notices, comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, rules, and regulations, obtain all necessary permits, licenses, including a City of Bozeman business license, and inspections from applicable governmental authorities, and pay all fees and charges in connection therewith. 13 Laws and Regulations: Contractor shall comply fully with all applicable state and federal laws, regulations, and municipal ordinances including, but not limited to, all workers’ compensation laws, all environmental laws including, but not limited to, the generation and disposal of hazardous waste, the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA), the safety rules, codes, and provisions of the Montana Safety Act in Title 50, Chapter 71, MCA, all applicable City, County, and State building and electrical codes, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and all non-discrimination, affirmative action, and utilization of minority and small business statutes and regulations. 14.Nondiscrimination and Equal Pay: The Contractor agrees that all hiring by Contractor of persons performing this Agreement shall be on the basis of merit and qualifications. The Contractor will have a policy to provide equal employment opportunity in accordance with all applicable state and federal anti-discrimination laws, regulations, and contracts. The Contractor will not refuse employment to a person, bar a person from employment, or discriminate against a person in compensation or in a term, condition, or privilege of employment because of race, color, religion, creed, political ideas, sex, age, marital status, national origin, actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender identity, physical or mental disability, except when the reasonable demands of the position require an age, physical or mental disability, marital status or sex distinction. The Contractor shall be subject to and comply with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; Section 140, Title 2, United States Code, and all regulations promulgated thereunder. Contractor represents it is, and for the term of this Agreement will be, in compliance with the requirements of the Equal Pay Act of 1963 and Section 39-3-104, MCA (the Montana Equal Pay Act). Contractor must report to the City any violations of the Montana Equal Pay Act that Contractor has 188 Professional Services Agreement for 2023 Water and Wastewater Utility Rate Model Updates Page 8 of 11 been found guilty of within 60 days of such finding for violations occurring during the term of this Agreement. Contractor shall require these nondiscrimination terms of its subcontractors providing services under this Agreement. 15.Intoxicants; DOT Drug and Alcohol Regulations/Safety and Training: Contractor shall not permit or suffer the introduction or use of any intoxicants, including alcohol or illegal drugs, by anyemployee or agent engaged in services to the City under this Agreement while on City property or in the performance of any activities under this Agreement. Contractor acknowledges it is aware of and shall comply with its responsibilities and obligations under the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) regulations governing anti-drug and alcohol misuse prevention plans and related testing. City shall have the right to request proof of such compliance and Contractor shall be obligated to furnish such proof. The Contractor shall be responsible for instructing and training the Contractor's employees and agents in proper and specified work methods and procedures. The Contractor shall provide continuous inspection and supervision of the work performed. The Contractor is responsible for instructing its employees and agents in safe work practices. 16.Modification and Assignability: This Agreement may not be enlarged, modified or altered except by written agreement signed by both parties hereto. The Contractor may not subcontract or assign Contractor’s rights, including the right to compensation or duties arising hereunder, without the prior written consent of the City. Any subcontractor or assignee will be bound by all of the terms and conditions of this Agreement. 17. Reports/Accountability/Public Information: Contractor agrees to develop and/or provide documentation as requested by the City demonstrating Contractor’s compliance with the requirements of this Agreement. Contractor shall allow the City, its auditors, and other persons authorized by the City to inspect and copy its books and records for the purpose of verifying that the reimbursement of monies distributed to Contractor pursuant to this Agreement was used in compliance with this Agreement and all applicable provisions of federal, state, and local law. The Contractor shall not issue any statements, releases or information for public dissemination without prior approval of the City. 18.Non-Waiver: A waiver by either party of any default or breach by the other party of any terms or conditions of this Agreement does not limit the other party’s right to enforce such term or conditions or to pursue any available legal or equitable rights in the event of any subsequent default or breach. 189 Professional Services Agreement for 2023 Water and Wastewater Utility Rate Model Updates Page 9 of 11 19.Attorney’s Fees and Costs: In the event it becomes necessary for either Party to retain an attorney to enforce any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement or to give any notice required herein, then the prevailing Party or the Party giving notice shall be entitled to reasonable attorney's fees and costs, including fees, salary, and costs of in-house counsel including the City Attorney’s Office staff. 20.Taxes: Contractor is obligated to pay all taxes of any kind or nature and make all appropriate employee withholdings. 21.Dispute Resolution: a.Any claim, controversy, or dispute between the parties, their agents, employees, or representatives shall be resolved first by negotiation between senior-level personnel from each party duly authorized to execute settlement agreements. Upon mutual agreement of the parties, the parties may invite an independent, disinterested mediator to assist in the negotiated settlement discussions. b.If the parties are unable to resolve the dispute within thirty (30) days from the date the dispute was first raised, then such dispute may only be resolved in a court of competent jurisdiction in compliance with the Applicable Law provisions of this Agreement. 22.Survival: Contractor’s indemnification shall survive the termination or expiration of this Agreement for the maximum period allowed under applicable law. 23.Headings: The headings used in this Agreement are for convenience only and are not be construed as a part of the Agreement or as a limitation on the scope of the particular paragraphs to which they refer. 24.Severability: If any portion of this Agreement is held to be void or unenforceable, the balance thereof shall continue in effect. 25.Applicable Law: The parties agree that this Agreement is governed in all respects by the laws of the State of Montana. 26.Binding Effect: This Agreement is binding upon and inures to the benefit of the heirs, legal representatives, successors, and assigns of the parties. 27.No Third-Party Beneficiary: This Agreement is for the exclusive benefit of the 190 Professional Services Agreement for 2023 Water and Wastewater Utility Rate Model Updates Page 10 of 11 parties, does not constitute a third-party beneficiary agreement, and may not be relied upon or enforced by a third party. 28.Counterparts: This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, which together constitute one instrument. 29.Integration: This Agreement and all Exhibits attached hereto constitute the entire agreement of the parties. Covenants or representations not contained herein or made a part thereof by reference, are not binding upon the parties. There are no understandings between the parties other than as set forth in this Agreement. All communications, either verbal or written, made prior to the date of this Agreement are hereby abrogated and withdrawn unless specifically made a part of this Agreement by reference. 30.Consent to Electronic Signatures: The Parties have consented to execute this Agreement electronically in conformance with the Montana Uniform Electronic Transactions Act, Title 30, Chapter 18, Part 1, MCA. 31.Extensions:this Agreement may, upon mutual agreement, be extended for a period of one year by written agreement of the Parties. In no case, however, may this Agreement run longer than __________________________. 32.Standard of Care:In providing services under this Agreement, Contractor will perform in a manner consistent with the degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the same profession currently practicing under similar circumstances. If any service should be found to be not in conformance with this standard, the Contractor shall, at the City’s request, re-perform the service at its own expense. Contractor shall also, at its own expense, make such changes, modifications or additions to the project which are made necessary as a result of the initial non-performance or the re-performance of services. The City’s rights herein are in addition to any other remedies the City may have under the law. 33.Ownership and Reuse of Documents: Upon payment in full by Cityto Contractor for all monies due Contractor under this Agreement, Contractor’s work products produced under this Agreement shall become the sole property of the City. The City’s use, reuse, alteration, or modification of the work products will be at City’s sole risk and without liability or legal exposure to Contractor or to its officers, directors, members, partners, agents, employees, and consultants. **** END OF AGREEMENT EXCEPT FOR SIGNATURES **** 191 Professional Services Agreement for 2023 Water and Wastewater Utility Rate Model Updates Page 11 of 11 IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties hereto have executed this Agreement the day and year first above written or as recorded in an electronic signature. CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA Advanced Engineering and Environmental Services, LLC CONTRACTOR (Type Name Above) By________________________________By__________________________________ Jeff Mihelich, City Manager Print Name: ___________________________ Print Title: ____________________________ APPROVED AS TO FORM: By_______________________________ Greg Sullivan, Bozeman City Attorney 192 January 5, 2023 City of Bozeman Attn: Melissa Hodnett Finance Director P.O. Box 1230, 121 N Rouse Avenue Bozeman, MT 59771-1230 Re: Proposed Scope and Fee for FY24 Water and Wastewater Utility Rate Model Updates Dear Melissa: As a follow-up to our conversation regarding updates to your Water and Wastewater Utility rate models, I am forwarding a summary of our understanding of the requested scope, along with an estimated fee. Water and Wastewater Revenue Adequacy Model Updates The Water and Wastewater Revenue Adequacy analyses completed in 2018 included projections through 2024. AE2S Nexus most recently worked with the City to update the models in 2021. The City will be adopting an updated capital plan in December 2022 and has incorporated this data and preliminary budget data into the revenue adequacy model. At your request, we will review the model and provide some updates as discussed. The result will be a current model that can be used for the next ten-year planning period to help you with annual rate-setting as part of the budget process. Specific subtasks to this effort include: 1. Review Operation and Maintenance (O&M) budget updates you have made, revise/update the model as appropriate; 2. Review and incorporate updates Capital Improvement Plans (CIPs) into rate calculations and reserve funding projections; 3. Project revenues based on existing rates, customer accounts, and water/wastewater sales (volumes); 4. Add a tab that can be directly compared to your General Ledger report – we will work with what you have started and make sure it ties in appropriately to the model; 5. Add a tab to incorporate Impact Fee projections; 6. Review cash flow projections and calculations to ensure any updates are flowing through the model properly; Project cash flows based on current cash balances and projected revenue requirements; and 7. Review cash flow and rate projections with City staff. 8. Present results to City Commission (in person), if requested. 193 Ms. Melissa Hodnett City of Bozeman Re: Proposed Scope and Fee for FY24 Water and Wastewater Utility Rate Model Updates January 5, 2023 Page 2 of 2 Meetings and Correspondence After review and the requested modifications are complete, AE2S Nexus will meet via electronic media with City staff to review model components and answer questions related to updates and results of the updates and projected 2023 rates. The updated Excel spreadsheet models will be provided to the City once any additional modifications have been made following the review meetings. Specific subtasks are: 1. Hold up to four (4) electronic meetings with City staff to discuss model updates and results; and 2. Deliver the updated rate model spreadsheets. The below table outlines an estimate of hours and fees for the completion of the scope of services requested. We understand that you would like the updated model to be available in early February 2023 for use in the 2024 budgeting process. We are prepared to meet that deadline. Task Estimated Hours Labor Expense Total Revenue Adequacy Model Review and Updates Water 68 $10,700 $10,700 Wastewater 68 $10,700 $10,700 Meetings and Correspondence Electronic Meetings to answer questions/review models and results 12 $2,600 $2,600 Presentation to City Commission (Optional) 30 $5,800 $2,400 $8,200 Estimated Fee $32,200 AE2S Nexus greatly appreciates the continued opportunity to provide professional service to the City of Bozeman. If you have any questions or require any additional information regarding this proposed work, please do not hesitate to contact me at (701) 746-8087. Sincerely, AE2S Nexus Miranda Kleven, PE Senior Consultant 194 Memorandum REPORT TO:City Commission FROM:Anna Bentley, Community Development Director SUBJECT:Authorize the City Manager to Sign an Amendment to Terms for the Existing Host Compliance Granicus Vendor Contract MEETING DATE:February 14, 2023 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Agreement - Vendor/Contract RECOMMENDATION:Authorize the City Manager or his designee to sign the terms amendment to the existing Host Compliance / Granicus contract. STRATEGIC PLAN:4.2 High Quality Urban Approach: Continue to support high-quality planning, ranging from building design to neighborhood layouts, while pursuing urban approaches to issues such as multimodal transportation, infill, density, connected trails and parks, and walkable neighborhoods. BACKGROUND:In September 2019 the City entered into a vendor contract for short-term rental license management with a company now known as Host Compliance, owned by Granicus. That contract has renewed annually since 2019 with no changes to terms. The current contract expires September 2023. A contract amendment is proposed to update certain terms of the agreements, to bring this contract more in line with current practice. Adjustments include updating the vendor name and adding contract termination for convenience. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None. ALTERNATIVES:As directed by the City Commission. FISCAL EFFECTS:This contract amendment does not alter existing cost/fees for service. The existing cost is $24,363.83, paid quarterly. Attachments: MT_Bozeman_2023FEB1_ Final.pdf Report compiled on: February 7, 2023 195 1 Granicus Services Agreement THIS SERVICES AGREEMENT (the “Agreement") is entered into as of September 25, 2022 (the “Effective Date"), between Granicus LLC, (“Granicus") and the City of Bozeman, Montana, with an address at 121 N. Rouse Avenue, Bozeman, MT 59715 (the “Customer"). This Agreement supersedes and replaces that certain Short-term Rental Monitoring and Associated Services Professional Services Agreement by and between the Customer and Host Compliance dated September 25, 2019 (the “Host Compliance Agreement”), and sets forth the terms and conditions under which Granicus agrees to license to Customer certain hosted software and provide all other services necessary for Customer's productive use of such software (the “Services”) as further described in the attached Schedule 1. 1.0 Services. 1.1 Subscriptions. Subject to and conditioned on Customer's payments pursuant to Section 4.0 of this Agreement, Granicus hereby grants Customer a non-exclusive, non-transferable right to access and use the Services during the term of this Agreement, in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. Unless otherwise provided in the attached Schedule 1, (a) Services are purchased as subscriptions, (b) additional service subscriptions may be added during a subscription term, with the pricing for such additional services, prorated for the portion of that subscription term remaining at the time the subscriptions are added, and (c) any added subscriptions will terminate on the same date as the underlying subscription. 1.2 Provision of Services. Customer and Customer's end-users (“End Users") may access and use the Services and any other Services that may be ordered by the Customer from time to time pursuant to a valid subscription in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. 1.3 Facilities and Data Processing. Granicus will use, at a minimum, industry standard technical and organizational security measures to store data provided by Customer, or obtained by Customer through the use of the Services (“Customer Data"). These measures are designed to protect the integrity of Customer Data and guard against unauthorized or unlawful access. 1.4 Modifications to the Services. Granicus may update the Services from time to time. If Granicus updates the Services in a manner that materially improves functionality, Granicus will inform the Customer. 2.0 Customer Obligations. 2.1 Customer Administration of the Services. Granicus' responsibilities do not extend to internal management or administration of the Services. Customer is responsible for: (i) maintaining the confidentiality of Customer passwords and accounts; (ii) managing Customer access to Granicus system administrator accounts; and (iii) ensuring that such administrators' use of the Services complies with this Agreement. 2.2 Compliance. Customer is responsible for use of the Services, including use of the Services by End Users and will comply with laws, regulations, and such provisions of this Agreement that are applicable to Customer's use of the Services. 2.3 Unauthorized Use & Access. Customer will take reasonable steps to prevent unauthorized use of the Services and terminate any unauthorized use of or access to the Services. Customer will promptly notify Granicus of any unauthorized use of or access to the Services. 2.4 Restricted Uses. Customer will not and will ensure that its End Users do not: (i) sell, resell, or lease the Services; (ii) reverse engineer or attempt to reverse engineer the Services, nor assist anyone else to do DocuSign Envelope ID: ED83342A-E1C9-48C5-8191-6C3520EF1AEA 196 2 so; or (iii) use the Services in any way that infringes, misappropriates, or otherwise violates any intellectual property right or other right of any person, or that violates any applicable law. 2.5 Third Party Requests. 2.5.1 "Third Party Request" means a request from a third party for records relating to Customer's or an End User's use of the Services including information regarding an End User. Third Party Requests may include valid search warrants, court orders, or subpoenas, or any other request for which there is written consent from End Users permitting a disclosure. 2.5.2 Customer is responsible for responding to Third Party Requests via its own access to information policies. Customer will seek to obtain information required to respond to Third Party Requests and will contact Granicus only if it cannot obtain such information despite diligent efforts. 2.5.3 If Granicus receives a Third Party Request, Granicus will make reasonable efforts, to the extent allowed by law and by the terms of the Third Party Request, to: (A) promptly notify Customer of Granicus's receipt of a Third Party Request; (B) comply with Customer's reasonable requests regarding efforts to oppose a Third Party Request; and (C) provide Customer with information or tools required for Customer to respond to the Third Party Request (if Customer is otherwise unable to obtain the information). If Customer fails to promptly respond to any Third Party Request, then Granicus may, but will not be obligated to do so. 2.5.4 If Customer receives a Third Party Request for access to the Services, or descriptions, drawings, images or videos of the Services' user interface, Customer will make reasonable efforts, to the extent allowed by law and by the terms of the Third Party Request, to: (A) promptly notify Granicus of Customer's receipt of such Third Party Request; (B) comply with Granicus's reasonable requests regarding efforts to oppose a Third Party Request ; and (C) provide Granicus with information required for Granicus to respond to the Third Party Request. If Granicus fails to promptly respond to any Third Party Request, then Customer may, but will not be obligated to do so. 3.0 Intellectual Property Rights; Confidentiality 3.1 Reservation of Rights. Except as expressly set forth herein, this Agreement does not grant (i) Granicus any intellectual Property Rights (as defined below) in the Customer Data or (ii) Customer any Intellectual Property Rights in the Services, any other products or offerings of Granicus, Granicus trademarks and brand features, or any improvements, modifications, or derivative works of any of the foregoing. Notwithstanding the foregoing, while Customer Data and Services may include some Publicly Available Data (as defined as below), neither Customer nor Granicus make any proprietary claim to Publicly Available Data. "Intellectual Property Rights" means current and future worldwide rights under patents, copyright, trade secret, trademark, moral rights, and other similar rights. "Publicly Available Data" means data, material, and information collected from publicly available sources in the performance of this Agreement, but specifically excluding Services. 3.2 Suggestions. Granicus may, at its discretion and for any purpose, use, modify, and incorporate into its products and services, and license and sub-license, any feedback, comments, or suggestions Customer or End Users send Granicus or post in Granicus's online forums without any obligation to Customer. 3.3 Confidential Information. Customer understands and agrees that it will not reveal, publish, or otherwise disclose to any person, firm, or corporation, without written authorization of Granicus, or except as required by law (including Montana's public records laws), any Confidential Information of DocuSign Envelope ID: ED83342A-E1C9-48C5-8191-6C3520EF1AEA 197 3 Granicus, including without limitation any trade secrets, confidential knowledge, data or other proprietary information relating to the Services. "Confidential Information" means all information, written or oral, relating to the business, operations, services, facilities, processes, methodology, technologies, intellectual property, research and development, customers, strategy or other confidential or proprietary materials of Granicus. 3.4 Consent to use Customer Data and Marks. Customer hereby irrevocably grants all such rights and permissions in or relating to Customer Data to Granicus: (i) to perform the Services; (ii) to enforce this Agreement and exercise Granicus rights hereunder; and (iii) to use for any lawful purpose. Customer hereby grants to Granicus a license to use, reproduce and display Customer's name and logos in connection with: (i) Granicus performance of its obligations hereunder; (ii) include Customer's name and logos in its lists of Granicus current or former customers, and (ii) with Customer's prior consent, for promotional and marketing purposes such as developing promotional press releases, case studies, and reports. 3.5 Validated Data. In the course of providing the Services, Granicus performs significant work validating and confirming various data sets including, without limitation, postal addresses, property owner information, and listing de-duplication ("Validated Data"). Validated Data may include data otherwise classified as Customer Data, Services, or Publicly Available Data. Notwithstanding any provision to the contrary in this Agreement, Customer is prohibited from disclosing Validated Data to a competitor of Granicus during the term of this Agreement and for a period of one (1) year thereafter. 4.0 Fees & Payment. 4.1 Fees. 4.1.1 Customer will pay Granicus for all applicable fees upfront annually, as set forth in Schedule A. 4.1.2 Customer will pay any amounts related to the Services as per payment terms detailed on the applicable invoice. Unless otherwise indicated, all dollar amounts referred to in the Agreement are in U.S. funds. 4.2 Taxes. Customer is responsible for all taxes. Granicus will charge tax when required to do so. If Customer is required by law to withhold any taxes, Customer must provide Granicus with an official tax receipt or other appropriate documentation. 4.3 Purchase Orders. If Customer requires the use of a purchase order or purchase order number, Customer (i) must provide the purchase number at the time of purchase and (ii) agrees that any terms and conditions on a Customer purchase order will not apply to this Agreement or the Services provided hereunder and are null and void. 5.0 Term & Termination. 5.1 Term. The initial term of this Agreement shall be one year commencing on the Effective Date, which shall automatically renew for a further period of one year upon each expiry of the then current term, unless either party provides written notice to the other party of its intention not to renew at least 45 days prior to the end of the then current term. Renewals at the same volume amount will not increase more than ten percent (10%) over the prior year’s fees. 5.2 Effects of Termination for Convenience. Either party may terminate this Agreement for their convenience upon 45 day written Notice of Termination for Convenience. If this Agreement is terminated for convenience (i) the rights granted by Granicus to Customer will cease and Customer will no longer have the right to utilize the data obtained through the use of the Services for outreach (including traditional mail, electronic mail, and/or telephone); and DocuSign Envelope ID: ED83342A-E1C9-48C5-8191-6C3520EF1AEA 198 4 (ii) after a reasonable period of time, Granicus will delete any Customer Data relating to Customer's account. The following sections will survive expiration or termination of this Agreement: 2.5 (Third Party Requests), 3.0 (Intellectual Property Rights; Confidentiality), 4.0 (Fees & Payments), 5.2 (Termination for Convenience), 5.3 (Effects of Termination for Convenience), 6.0 (Indemnification), 7.0 (Exclusion of Warranties; Limitation of Liability), and 8.0 (Miscellaneous). 5.3 Termination for Breach: Following the Trial Period, a party may terminate this Agreement for cause upon 45 days written notice to the other party of a material breach if such breach remains uncured at the expiration of such period. In addition, Granicus may terminate this Agreement, effective on written notice to Customer, if Customer fails to pay any amount when due hereunder, and such failure continues more than 10 days after Granicus's delivery of written notice hereof. 5.4 Refund or Payment upon Termination. If this Agreement is terminated by Customer in accordance with Section 5.2 (Termination for Convenience) or Section 5.3 (Termination for Breach), Granicus will refund Customer any prepaid fees covering the remainder of the term of all Subscriptions after the effective date of termination. If this Agreement is terminated by Granicus in accordance with Section 5.2 (Termination for Convenience) or Section 5.3 (Termination for Breach), Customer will pay any unpaid fees covering the remainder of the term of the Agreement. In no event will Customer's termination after the first 6 months relieve Customer of its obligation to pay any fees payable to Granicus for the period prior to the effective date of termination. 5.5 Effects of Termination for Breach. If this Agreement is terminated in accordance with Section 5.4 (Termination for Breach): (i) the rights granted by Granicus to Customer will cease immediately (except as set forth in this section); (ii) Granicus may provide Customer access to its account at then-current fees so the Customer may export its Customer Data; and (iii) after a reasonable period of time, Granicus may delete any Customer Data relating to Customer's account. The following sections will survive expiration or termination of this Agreement: 2.5 (Third Party Request s), 3.0 (Intellectual Property Rights; Confidentiality), 4.0 (Fees & Payments), 5.5 (Refund or Payment upon Termination for Breach), 5.6 (Effects of Termination for Breach), 6.0 (Indemnification), 7.0 (Exclusion of Warranties; Limitation of Liability), and 8.0 (Miscellaneous). 6.0 Indemnification and Insurance. 6.1 By Granicus. Granicus will indemnify, defend and hold harmless Customer from and against all liabilities, damages, and costs (including settlement costs and reasonable attorney's fees) arising out of any claim by a third party against Customer to the extent based on (i) allegations that Granicus' technology used to provide the Services to the Customer infringes or misappropriates any copyright, trade secret, patent or trademark right of the third party; or (ii) disclosure of personally identifiable information or other confidential Customer Data caused by the act or omission of Granicus or any of its agents, subcontractors, or employees, provided that to the extent the Customer has any role in such disclosure, the apportionment of liability shall be shared between the parties based upon the comparative degree of each party's negligence . Granicus's indemnity obligations under this section shall be without regard to and without any right to contribution from any insurance maintained by the City. 6.2 In no event will Granicus have any obligations or liability under this section arising from: (i) use of any Services in a modified form or in combination with materials not furnished by Granicus and (ii) any content, information, or data provided by Customers, End Users, or other third parties. 6.3 Possible Infringement. If Granicus believes the Services infringe or may be alleged to infringe a DocuSign Envelope ID: ED83342A-E1C9-48C5-8191-6C3520EF1AEA 199 5 third party's Intellectual Property Rights, then Granicus may (i) obtain the right for Customer, at Granicus' expense, to continue using the Services; (ii) provide a non-infringing functionally equivalent replacement for the Services; or (iii) modify the Services so that they no longer infringe. If Granicus does not believe the options described in this section are reasonable then Granicus may suspend or terminate this Agreement and/or Customer's use of the affected Services with no further liability or obligation to the Customer other than the obligation to provide the Customer with a pro-rata refund of pre-paid fees for the affected portion of the Services. 6.4 General. The party seeking indemnification will promptly notify the other party of the claim and cooperate with the other party in defending the claim. The indemnifying party will have full control and authority over the defense, except that: (i) any settlement requiring the party seeking indemnification to admit liability requires prior written consent, not to be unreasonably withheld or delayed and (ii) the other party may join in the defense with its own counsel at its own expense. The indemnities above are Granicus' and Customer's only remedy under this Agreement for violation by the other party of a third party's Intellectual Property Rights. 6.5 Insurance. Granicus shall at Granicus's expense secure insurance coverage through an insurance company or companies duly licensed and authorized to conduct insurance business in Montana which insures the liabilities and obligations specifically assumed by Granicus in this section. The insurance coverage shall not contain any exclusion for liabilities specifically assumed by Granicus in this section. The insurance shall cover and apply to all claims, demands, suits, damages, losses, and expenses that may be asserted or claimed against, recovered from, or suffered by the City without limit and without regard to the cause therefore and which is acceptable to the City and Granicus shall furnish to the City an accompanying certificate of insurance and accompanying endorsements in amounts not less than as follows: • Workers' Compensation - statutory; • Commercial General Liability - $1,000,000 per occurrence; $2,000,000 annual aggregate; and • Professional Liability - $1,000,000 per claim; $2,000,000 annual aggregate. The above amounts shall be exclusive of defense costs. The City of Bozeman, its officers, agents, and employees, shall be included as insured on a primary non-contributory basis on the Commercial General Liability policy. The insurance and required endorsements must be in a form suitable to City. The City must approve all insurance coverage and endorsements prior to the Contractor commencing work. Contractor shall notify City within five (5) business days of Contractor's receipt of notice that any required insurance coverage will be terminated or Contractor's decision to terminate any required insurance coverage for any reason. 7.0 EXCLUSION OF WARRANTIES; LIMITATION OF LIABILITY. 7.1 EXCLUSION OF WARRANTIES. EXCEPT AS EXPLICITLY SET FORTH IN THIS AGREEMENT, GRANICUS MAKES NO OTHER REPRESENTATION, WARRANTY OR CONDITION, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, AND EXPRESSLY EXCLUDES ALL IMPLIED OR STATUTORY WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF MERCHANTABILITY, MERCHANTABLE QUALITY, DURABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, ANDTHOSE ARISING BYSTATUTE OR OTHERWISE INLAW OR FROM ACOURSE OF DEALING OR USAGE OF TRADE WITH RESPECT TO THE SERVICES. GRANICUS DOES NOT MAKE ANY DocuSign Envelope ID: ED83342A-E1C9-48C5-8191-6C3520EF1AEA 200 6 REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND TO CLIENT WITH RESPECT TO ANY THIRD PARTY SOFTWARE FORMING PART OF THE SERVICES 7.2 LIMITATION ON INDIRECT LIABILITY. TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW, NEITHER CUSTOMER NOR GRANICUS AND ITS AFFILIATES, SUPPLIERS, AND DISTRIBUTORS WILL BE LIABLE UNDER THIS AGREEMENT FOR (I) INDIRECT, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR PUNITIVE DAMAGES, OR (II) LOSS OF USE, BUSINESS, REVENUE, OR PROFITS {IN EACH CASE WHETHER DIRECT OR INDIRECT), EVEN IF THE PARTY KNEW OR SHOULD HAVE KNOWN THAT SUCH DAMAGES WERE POSSIBLE AND EVEN IF A REMEDY FAILS OF ITS ESSENTIAL PURPOSE. 7.3 LIMITATION ON AMOUNT OF LIABILITY. FOR OTHER THAN GRANICUS'S INDEMNIFICATION OBLIGATIONS UNDER SECTION 6.1(I), TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW, GRANICUS'S AGGREGATE LIABILITY UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT EXCEED THE AMOUNT PAID BY CUSTOMER TO GRANICUS HEREUNDER DURING THE TWELVE MONTHS PRIOR TO THE EVENT GIVING RISE TO LIABILITY. 8.0 Miscellaneous. 8.1 Terms Modification. Granicus may wish to revise this Agreement from time to time. If a revision, in Granicus' sole discretion, is material, Granicus will notify Customer and possibly request that an Amendment to this Agreement be agreed upon and signed. If Customer does not agree to the revised Agreement terms, Customer may terminate the Services within 30 days of receiving notice of the change. 8.2 Entire Agreement. The Agreement including the invoice and order form provided by Granicus, constitutes the entire agreement between Customer and Granicus with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement and supersedes and replaces any prior or contemporaneous understandings and agreements, whether written or oral, with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement. If there is a conflict between the documents that make up this Agreement, the documents will control in the following order: this Agreement, then the invoice, then the order form. 8.3 Governing Law. This Agreement will in all respects be governed exclusively by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Montana. 8.4 Severability. Unenforceable provisions will be modified to reflect the parties' intention and only to the extent necessary to make them enforceable, and the remaining provisions of the Agreement will remain in full effect. 8.5 Waiver or Delay. Any express waiver or failure to exercise promptly any right under the Agreement will not create a continuing waiver or any expectation of non-enforcement. 8.6 Force Majeure. Except for payment obligations, neither Granicus nor Customer will be liable for inadequate performance to the extent caused by a condition that was beyond the party's reasonable control (for example, natural disaster, act of war or terrorism, riot, labor condition, governmental action and Internet disturbance). 8.7 Procurement Piggybacking. Granicus agrees to reasonably participate in any "piggybacking" programs pertinent to local government, and Customer agrees to reasonably allow any local government to "piggyback" off of Customer's efforts leading to DocuSign Envelope ID: ED83342A-E1C9-48C5-8191-6C3520EF1AEA 201 7 this Agreement. 8.8 Independent Contractor. It is specifically understood and agreed that in the making and performance of this Agreement, Granicus is an independent contractor and is not and shall not be construed to be an employee of Customer. 8.9 Nondiscrimination and Equal Pay. Granicus agrees that all hiring by Granicus of persons performing this Agreement shall be on the basis of merit and qualifications. Granicus will have a policy to provide equal employment opportunity in accordance with all applicable state and federal anti- discrimination laws, regulations, and contracts. Granicus will not refuse employment to a person, bar a person from employment, or discriminate against a person in compensation or in a term, condition, or privilege of employment because of race, color, religion, creed, political ideas, sex, age, marital status, national origin, actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender identity, physical or mental disability, except when the reasonable demands of the position require an age, physical or mental disability, marital status or sex distinction. Granicus represents it is, and for the term of this Agreement will be, in compliance with the requirements of the Equal Pay Act of 1963. Granicus shall require these nondiscrimination terms of its subcontractors providing services under this Agreement. 8.10 Consent to Electronic Signatures: The parties have consented to execute this Agreement electronically in conformance with the Montana Uniform Electronic Transactions Act, Title 30, Chapter 18, Part 1, MCA. DocuSign Envelope ID: ED83342A-E1C9-48C5-8191-6C3520EF1AEA 202 IN WITNESS WHEREOF Granicus and the Customer have executed this Agreement as of the Effective Date. Bozeman, MT Signature: Name: Title: Date: Granicus Signature: Name: Title: Date: DocuSign Envelope ID: ED83342A-E1C9-48C5-8191-6C3520EF1AEA Bernadette Foley 2/2/2023 Manager, Renewals 203 Order #: Q-208935 Prepared: 10/28/2022 Page 1 of 3 SCHEDULE 1 408 Saint Peter Street, Suite 600 Order Form Saint Paul, MN 55102 Prepared for United States Bozeman, MT Granicus Budgetary Proposal for Bozeman, MT Please note: This is not an invoice. This is a budgetary proposal that outlines the products and fees associated with the subscription renewal. Please inform the Granicus Contact listed below if you wish to issue a PO against this budgetary proposal. ORDER DETAILS Prepared By: Jessica Shubbie Phone: Email: jessica.shubbie@granicus.com Order #: Q-208935 Prepared On: 10/28/2022 Expires On: 09/24/2022 ORDER TERMS Currency: USD Payment Terms: Net 30 (Payments for subscriptions are due at the beginning of the period of performance.) Current Subscription End Date: 09/24/2022 Period of Performance: 09/25/2022 - 09/24/2023 DocuSign Envelope ID: ED83342A-E1C9-48C5-8191-6C3520EF1AEA 204 Order #: Q-208935 Prepared: 10/28/2022 Page 2 of 3 Order Form Bozeman, MT PRICING SUMMARY The pricing and terms within this Proposal are specific to the products and volumes contained within this Proposal. Renewing Subscription Fees Solution Billing Frequency Quantity/Unit Annual Fee 24/7 Hotline Annual 1 Each $2,499.52 Address Identification Annual 1 Each $13,388.91 Compliance Monitoring Annual 1 Each $3,124.40 Mobile Permitting & Registration Annual 1 Each $5,350.00 SUBTOTAL: $24,362.83 DocuSign Envelope ID: ED83342A-E1C9-48C5-8191-6C3520EF1AEA 205 Order #: Q-208935 Prepared: 10/28/2022 Page 3 of 3 Order Form Bozeman, MT TERMS & CONDITIONS • This quote is exclusive of applicable state, local, and federal taxes, which, if any, will be included in the invoice. It is the responsibility of Bozeman, MT to provide applicable exemption certificate(s). • Any lapse in payment may result in suspension of service and will require the payment of a setup fee to reinstate the subscription. • Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, Granicus reserves the right to adjust pricing at any renewal in which the volume has changed from the prior term without regard to the prior term's per-unit pricing. • Renewal pricing for Address Identification, Compliance Monitoring, Rental Activity Monitoring, 24/7 Hotline, Tax Collection, and Mobile Permitting & Registration is based on the average volume of rental listings or units for the preceding 10-12 months and is subject to volume-based pricing adjustments as described herein. DocuSign Envelope ID: ED83342A-E1C9-48C5-8191-6C3520EF1AEA 206 Memorandum REPORT TO:City Commission FROM:Taylor Lonsdale, Transportation Engineer Nicholas Ross, Director of Transportation and Engineering SUBJECT:Authorize the City Manager to Sign an Amendment 1 to Task Order 14 with Sanderson Stewart for the Purpose of Right-of-Way Acquisition on the N 19th Avenue Pathway project MEETING DATE:February 14, 2023 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Agreement - Vendor/Contract RECOMMENDATION:Authorize the City Manager to Sign an Amendment 1 to Task Order 14 with Sanderson Stewart for the Purpose of Right-of-Way Acquisition on the N 19th Avenue Pathway project STRATEGIC PLAN:4.5 Housing and Transportation Choices: Vigorously encourage, through a wide variety of actions, the development of sustainable and lasting housing options for underserved individuals and families and improve mobility options that accommodate all travel modes. BACKGROUND:Under Task Order 14 of our Professional Services Agreement for Right of Way services Sanderson Stewart is working with two property owners along N 19th Ave to acquire easements for two pathway infill segments. The timing of the process and the easement details require additional scope from the original Task Order. Staff has reviewed the need for additional work and suggest approval of the Amendment #1. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None. ALTERNATIVES:None identified or recommended. FISCAL EFFECTS:The proposed fee for the scope of work outlined in these task orders is paid on a time and materials basis with a not to exceed total cost. The not to exceed amount for Amendment 1 is $2,000.00. The funds for this are available from and will be drawn from SIF001, Right of Way Acquisition. Attachments: ROW TO #14_19th Ave Path Prpsl_Amendment 1.pdf Report compiled on: February 3, 2023 207 _____ Initials February 3, 2023 Mr. Taylor Lonsdale, PE City of Bozeman 20 East Olive St. Bozeman, MT 59715 Reference: City of Bozeman Land Agent Services Project Scope of Services – Task Order No. #14, Amendment #1 North 19th Avenue Shared Use Pathway Dear Mr. Lonsdale: This amended scope of services for land agent services is for street and utility improvements for the North 19th Avenue corridor. These services are to be performed under the Professional Services Agreement for Streets and Land Agent Services term contract (FY 2018 – FY 2020) for realty and engineering services. If this Amendment #1 to the scope of services is acceptable to you, please execute this agreement where noted. Overview The timing of the process and the easement details require additional scope from the original Task Order. Owner meetings necessitated additional review and significant modification of acquisition documents that require additional coordination with City engineering and legal staff. Several changes of the acquisition details are required to complete the acquisition for the project per the final design plans, requiring additional time. Sanderson Stewart will provide professional right-of-way (R/W) acquisition services to acquire new R/W for the project. Scope of Services Sanderson Stewart will provide the following services as part of its basic services: 1. Project Research This task is not included in this scope of services. 2. Initial Property Owner Contact This task is not included in this scope of services. 208 Mr. Taylor Lonsdale February 3, 2023 Page 2 _____ Initials 3. R/W Mapping & Exhibits This task is not included in this scope of services. 4. Title Commitments This task is not included in this scope of services. 5. Appraisals and Valuations This task is not included in this scope of services. 6. Prepare Contracts This task includes the preparation of the offer packages to acquire R/W, including agreements, easements, temporary construction permits, exhibits, figures, and correspondence letters. Subtasks under Item 6 include the following: · The acquisition agreements require significant modification with owner and client changes. Additional time modifying acquisition documents per negations with the owners and review with City staff is required. · QA/QC of documents. 7. Acquisitions This task includes conducting the acquisition meetings with affected property owners and modifying the initial offer packages based on owner/client meetings. Subtasks under Item 7 include the following: · Conduct acquisition meetings beyond the previously scoped (minimum of 3 meetings per parcel) with Parcel 2. · Prepare final acquisition documents and costs for Parcel 2. · QA/QC of documents. 8. R/W and Design Plan Updates This task is not included in this scope of services. 9. Relocation Services This task is not included in this scope of services. 10. Title Clearing and Closing 209 Mr. Taylor Lonsdale February 3, 2023 Page 3 _____ Initials This task is not included in this scope of services. 11. Final Submittal and Closeout This task is not included in this scope of services. 12. Contingency This task is not included in this scope of services. 13. Project Administration This task is not included in this scope of services. The following items are not included in the scope of services or project budget for this project and are therefore specifically excluded from this scope of services: · Engineering or right-of-way design services · Eminent domain proceedings, expert witness testimony, costs, or other services necessary for legal proceedings · Additional costs related to the actual purchase price of property interests as detailed in R/W acquisition agreements · Relocation costs paid to property owners as detailed in R/W acquisition agreements If needed, these items will be added as a separate task order or contract amendment. Services not set forth above as basic services are specifically excluded from the scope of Sanderson Stewart’s services. Sanderson Stewart assumes no responsibility to perform any services not specifically listed as basic services. Additional services are not included in the basic services. If the Client and Sanderson Stewart agree in writing via an amendment to this agreement, Sanderson Stewart will provide additional services as requested by the Client. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Sanderson Stewart shall have the right, but not the obligation, to provide, without advance authorization from the Client, other services made necessary by the default of the contractor or Client, or by deficiencies, delays, or defects in the work provided by the contractor. Sanderson Stewart shall provide written notice of the provision of such services as soon as reasonably possible. 210 Mr. Taylor Lonsdale February 3, 2023 Page 4 _____ Initials Project Schedule Once Sanderson Stewart receives Client’s authorization to proceed, Sanderson Stewart will immediately proceed with fulfilling the project scope of services. The intent is to complete the R/W acquisition activities in as short amount of time as necessary. The Client and Sanderson Stewart are aware that many factors outside Sanderson Stewart’s control may affect Sanderson Stewart’s ability to complete the services to be provided under this agreement. Sanderson Stewart will perform these services with reasonable diligence and expediency consistent with sound professional practices. Fees and Billing Arrangements Invoice and Billing: Sanderson Stewart will bill for its services on a time-and-materials basis with a total cost not to exceed $2,000.00. Sanderson Stewart will begin work once this agreement has been executed by both parties. Right-of-Way Acquisition 1. Project Research $0.00 2. Initial Property Owner Contact $0.00 3. R/W Mapping & Exhibits $0.00 4. Title Commitments $0.00 5. Appraisals and Valuations $0.00 6. Prepare Contracts $350.00 7. Acquisitions $1,650.00 8. R/W and Design Plan Updates $0.00 9. Relocation Services $0.00 10. Title Clearing and Closing $0.00 11. Final Submittal and Closeout $0.00 12. Contingency $0.00 13. Project Administration $0.00 Subtotal for Amendment #1 $2,000.00 Current Contract Amount $13,615.00 Total Project Cost $15,615.00 Sanderson Stewart shall submit invoices to the Client for work accomplished during each calendar month. Monthly invoices shall include, separately listed, any charges for services for which time charges and/or unit costs shall apply. Such invoices shall also include, separately listed, any charges for consultants retained by Sanderson Stewart, and reimbursable costs. Such invoices shall be 211 Mr. Taylor Lonsdale February 3, 2023 Page 5 _____ Initials submitted by Sanderson Stewart as soon as possible after the end of the month in which the work was accomplished and shall be due and payable by the Client upon receipt. The Client agrees that the monthly invoice from Sanderson Stewart is correct, conclusive, and binding on the Client unless the Client, within 20 working days from the date of receipt of such invoice, notifies Sanderson Stewart in writing of alleged inaccuracies, discrepancies, errors in the invoice, or the need for additional backup. Conclusion Mr. Lonsdale, we look forward to continue working with you on this project. Feel free to call me at 406/922-4304 if you have any questions regarding this proposal. Otherwise, if it meets your approval, simply mail or email this signed and dated agreement to our office at 106 E Babcock, Suite L1, Bozeman, MT 59715 or tgaddo@sandersonstewart.com. Thank you. Sincerely, Tony Gaddo, P.E., REALTOR® Senior Engineer / Right-of-Way Specialist TG Enc. **** END OF SCOPE OF SERVICES EXCEPT FOR SIGNATURES **** 212 Mr. Taylor Lonsdale February 3, 2023 Page 6 _____ Initials This Amendment #1 to Task Order #14 is dated ________________, 20___ between City of Bozeman, Montana (City) and Sanderson Stewart (Contractor). IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this instrument the day and year first above written. CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA SANDERSON STEWART By: By: Print Name: Print Name: Print Title: Print Title: Date: Date: 213 Memorandum REPORT TO:City Commission FROM:Adam Oliver, Stormwater Program Manager John Alston, Utilities Director SUBJECT:Authorize the City Manager to Sign a Task Order 8 of the Stormwater Design Professional Services Master Task Order Agreement with DOWL, LLC for the Downtown Mechanical Treatment Project Phase 4 MEETING DATE:February 14, 2023 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Agreement - Vendor/Contract RECOMMENDATION:Authorize the City Manager to sign Task Order 8 of the Stormwater Design Professional Services Master Task Order Agreement with DOWL, LLC for the Downtown Mechanical Treatment Project Phase 4. STRATEGIC PLAN:4.3 Strategic Infrastructure Choices: Prioritize long-term investment and maintenance for existing and new infrastructure. BACKGROUND:In 2019, the Stormwater Division (Division) advertised a Request For Qualifications for on-call engineering services. The Division selected DOWL, LLC (Consultant), negotiated a task order based Professional Services Agreement (PSA), and delivered the PSA to the Commission on September 16, 2019, for approval. The Division hires the Consultant as projects arise, and funding is available. Attached is Task Order 8 of the governing PSA, ready for the Commission’s consideration. Task Order 8 contracts with the Consultant for the design and construction oversight necessary to complete the Downtown Mechanical Treatment Project Phase 4 (Project). This Project involves installation of two in-line mechanical separation units designed to separate and collect pollutants from stormwater runoff. The proposed locations are near the intersections of Peach and Tamarack with Rouse. The benefits of this project include decreased pollutant loading into Bozeman Creek and a measurable step towards water quality permit compliance. The Project is in line with Strategic Plan goals of A Sustainable Environment as well as Strategic Infrastructure Choices. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None ALTERNATIVES:As suggested by the Commission. 214 FISCAL EFFECTS:The Commission first approved funding for this capital project with the FY21 Approved Budget ($300,000 STRH01). Payments for services provided will be on a time and material basis, not to exceed $97,000. Staff reviewed Task Order 8 and found its scope and budget to be commensurate with the proposed services. Attachments: A - Task Order 08 - Scope of Services.pdf B - Professional Services Master Task Order Agreement.pdf Report compiled on: January 31, 2023 215 Page 1 Task Order #08 Exhibit A – Scope of Services Peach and Tamarack Stormwater Treatment Improvements Introduction The City of Bozeman (City) Stormwater Division has identified two (2) locations to install hydrodynamic stormwater treatment units. The proposed stormwater treatment units will generally be located within the East Peach Street and East Tamarack Street corridors near the intersection of North Rouse Avenue. The final location of the units will be identified in the project preliminary design phase. The stormwater treatment units are intended to improve the water quality of the collected stormwater runoff prior to discharge into Bozeman Creek. The following scope of services for the above described projects will generally consist of topographical surveys, preliminary design recommendations for locating and sizing the treatment units, development of construction documents, and construction administration services. A detailed description of engineering services is identified in the subsequent sections. It is assumed that the City of Bozeman will provide Project Management throughout the duration of the projects and will be responsible for the following tasks: Permitting (if necessary) Bidding and Contract Negotiations Hosting the Pre-bid and Pre-construction Meetings Reviewing Construction Schedules Providing Public Outreach and Coordination with Property Owners Acquiring necessary project easements Administering Recommended Change Orders and Work Change Directives Processing Applications for Payment Managing the Construction Contract and Related Disputes (as needed) Issuing Notice of Substantial and Final Project Completion Providing other Non-Technical General Construction Administration Tasks DOWL will provide the following project design and construction administration services for the proposed Projects. Scope of Services (Basic Services) The below tasks will be completed for both proposed stormwater treatment units. Task 1.Preliminary Project Design 1.Complete the following specific tasks related to the preliminary design of the Peach and Tamarack Stormwater Treatment Improvements project: a.Task 100 – Project Management, Quality Control, and Design Review Meeting(s): Perform general project management tasks, including job setup, contracting, internal quality control procedures, project planning, scheduling, and coordination calls and meetings related to Task 1. Project invoices will be delivered electronically to the City’s Project Manager monthly for processing and 216 Task Order #08, Exhibit A – Scope of Services Peach and Tamarack Stormwater Treatment Improvements Page 2 payment. Invoicing will track each project separately on the same invoice and will include services completed for the pay period, monthly charges, total spent, and amount remaining. b.Task 110 – Utility Locates and Survey: Survey base mapping will be developed for the two (2) project corridors. Services performed under this task will include requesting utility locates, survey of utilities, and topographic survey of the project vicinity. DOWL will develop and submit a utility locate request and will survey the locations of utilities within the project corridor. Rim elevation survey and measure-downs to pipe inverts will be completed to document existing pipe elevations and sizes of the stormwater, sanitary sewer and water infrastructure within the general area of the proposed treatment units. The survey will be completed in NAD83 state plane coordinates and using the vertical datum NAVD88. DOWL will notify the City of Bozeman in advance of the utility locates and survey to obtain permission to enter private property in the vicinity of the project. c.Task 120 – Preliminary Design: DOWL will complete a hydrologic model and hydraulic routing of precipitation events for the existing Peach Street and Tamarack Street stormwater collection basins. The hydrologic analyses will be based on precipitation hyetographs recently developed by DOWL for use on other City of Bozeman Stormwater Division projects. Hydraulic routing will be completed using the program Autodesk Storm and Sanitary Analysis (ASSA). The stormwater collection system ASSA model will be based on DOWL’s existing model of the stormwater system, which will be compared to the City’s GIS and record drawing information. The models for each basin will be a general analysis of basin runoff and pipe conveyance to determine the size of the water quality treatment structures for the Peach and Tamarack Street treatment units. Additionally, DOWL will recommend locations for the stormwater treatment units based on the unit size, existing stormwater piping and other utilities, and proximity to the stormwater outfall. Preliminary locations and configurations (i.e., horizontal positions, vertical locations, and treatment structure depths) will be depicted in a preliminary (approximate 30% level of design) plan and profile drawing. 2.The following project deliverables will be provided to the City for review and comment. DOWL will provide digital PDF copies of all deliverables. It is assumed that review comments will be received from the City within 14 days of receipt of each review set described below. a.Technical Memorandum of design assumptions, hydrologic modeling results, recommended location and treatment unit sizing, project exhibit(s), and a preliminary engineer’s estimate of probable construction cost. 3.Design Review Meeting: A design review meeting will be conducted after the Technical Memorandum submittals to review the project recommendations and discuss the City’s comments. It is assumed that the design review meeting will be held virtually via teleconference or Microsoft Teams. Task 2.Construction Documents 1.Complete the following specific tasks related to the design and development of the Peach and Tamarack Stormwater Treatment Improvements project construction documents: a.Task 200 – Project Management, Quality Control, and Design Review Meeting(s): Perform general project management tasks, internal quality control procedure, project planning, scheduling, and coordination calls and meetings related to Task 2. b.Task 210 – Construction Drawings: DOWL will develop construction drawings for the proposed stormwater treatment improvements, with one set of construction drawings describing and 217 Task Order #08, Exhibit A – Scope of Services Peach and Tamarack Stormwater Treatment Improvements Page 3 containing both projects. The project design and drawing will be based on Contech’s CDS treatment units. The project construction drawings will generally consist of the following: Table 1 – Preliminary Sheet Index Drawing No. Drawing Description G00 Cover Sheet G01 General Notes, Legend, Abbreviations, Survey Control C01 Existing Conditions C02-C03 Overall Project Site Improvements Map C04-C05 Stormwater Treatment and Pipelines Plan and Profile(s) D01-D02 Treatment Units and Standard Details c.Task 220 – Construction Specifications: Project specifications will be based upon the Montana Public Works Standard Specifications, Sixth Edition (April 2010) and the City of Bozeman Modifications to Montana Public Works Standard Specifications, Sixth Edition, March 21, 2011, and Addenda No. 1 through No. 3. i.Project specific conditions and construction constraints will be outlined in a separate Summary of Work to detail the work description, identify work sequence restrictions, bypass pumping operation, work schedule, etc. ii.Additionally, DOWL will provide a draft advertisement for bidding, itemized bid schedule, measurement and payment, and standalone modifications to Montana Public Works Standard Specifications as necessary. d.Task 230 – Engineers’ Estimate of Probable Construction Cost: DOWL will develop an engineers’ opinion of probable construction cost for the project to assist the City with project planning and budgeting. 2.The following project deliverables will be provided to the City for review and comment including review by legal counsel or other advisors as appropriate. DOWL will provide digital PDF copies of all deliverables unless otherwise noted below. It is assumed that review comments will be received from the City within 14 days of receipt of each review set described below. a.95% complete set of construction drawings and technical specifications, and engineer’s estimate of probable construction cost. b.Project Manual consisting of issued for construction (100%) project drawings and technical specifications necessary for bidding and construction of the proposed projects. 3.Design Review Meeting: A design review meeting will be conducted after the 95% submittal to review the project and discuss City comments. It is assumed that the design review meetings will be held virtually via teleconference or Microsoft Teams. Task 3.Assistance During Bidding and Contract Award 1.Task 300 – Assist the city in advertising for and obtaining bid proposals for the Work. a.Assist the City with bidding documents for the City to post and manage through QuestCDN. b.Assist the City in providing clarifications to Contractor questions during bidding. 218 Task Order #08, Exhibit A – Scope of Services Peach and Tamarack Stormwater Treatment Improvements Page 4 c.Assist in developing addenda as appropriate to clarify, correct, or change the bidding documents. One bid addendum is assumed following the pre-bid meeting to distribute meeting minutes and provide formal answers to any questions posed/answered at the pre-bid meeting. The city will post addendum(s) to Quest for Planholder distribution. 2.Task 310 – Assist in preparing an agenda and participate in a Pre-bid meeting to summarize the project for interested bidders and gather questions for clarifications via addendum, if needed. It is assumed that the City will be responsible for bid opening, certified bid tab, assembly of insurance, bonds, agreements, and additional documents to finalize the bidding process and award the contract. Task 4.Construction Administration Upon successful completion of the bidding, negotiating and project construction award, and upon written authorization from Owner, DOWL shall complete the following tasks: 1.Task 400 – General Administration of Construction Contract: DOWL with the City, acts as the Owner’s representative as provided in the Construction Contract. The extent and limitations of the duties, responsibilities, and authority of Engineer as assigned in the Construction Contract shall not be modified, except as Engineer may otherwise agree in writing. All of Owner’s instructions to Contractor will be issued through the Engineer, which shall have authority to act on behalf of the Owner in dealings with the Contractor to the extent provided in this Agreement and the Construction Contract except as otherwise provided in writing. 2.Task 410 – Pre-Construction Conference: Participate in a Pre-Construction Conference prior to commencement of Work at the Site. 3.Task 420 – Shop Drawings and Samples: Review and approve or take other appropriate action in respect to Shop Drawings and Samples and other information that Contractor is required to submit, but only for conformance with the information provided in the Contract Documents and compatibility with the design concept of the completed Project as a functioning whole as indicated by the Contract Documents. Such reviews and approvals or other action will not extend to means, methods, techniques, sequences, or procedures of construction or to safety precautions and programs incident thereto. a.Substitutes and “or-equal”: Evaluate and determine the acceptability of substitute or “or-equal” materials and equipment proposed by Contractor, but subject to the Additional Services provisions of Attachment 1. 4.Task 430 – Visits to Site and Observation of Construction: In connection with observations of Contractor’s Work while it is in progress: a.Make visits to the Site at intervals appropriate to the various stages of construction, as Engineer deems necessary, to observe as an experienced and qualified design professional the progress of Contractor’s executed Work. Such visits and observations by Engineer, and the Resident Project Representative, if any, are not intended to be exhaustive or to extend to every aspect of Contractor’s Work in progress or to involve detailed inspections of Contractor’s Work in progress beyond the responsibilities specifically assigned to Engineer in this Agreement and the Contract Documents, but rather are to be limited to spot checking, selective sampling, and similar methods of general observation of the Work based on Engineer’s exercise of professional judgment, as assisted by the Resident Project Representative, if any. Based on information obtained during such visits and observations, Engineer will determine in general if the Work is proceeding in accordance with the Contract Documents, and Engineer shall keep Owner informed of the progress of the Work. 219 Task Order #08, Exhibit A – Scope of Services Peach and Tamarack Stormwater Treatment Improvements Page 5 b.The purpose of Engineer’s visits to, and representation by the Resident Project Representative, if any, at the Site, will be to enable Engineer to better carry out the duties and responsibilities assigned to and undertaken by Engineer during the Construction Phase, and, in addition, by the exercise of Engineer’s efforts as an experienced and qualified design professional, to provide Owner a greater degree of confidence that the completed Work will conform in general to the Contract Documents and that Contractor has implemented and maintained the integrity of the design concept of the completed Project as a functioning whole as indicated in the Contract Documents. Engineer shall not, during such visits or as a result of such observations of Contractor’s Work in progress, supervise, direct, or have control over Contractor’s Work, nor shall Engineer have authority over or responsibility for the means, methods, techniques, sequences, or procedures of construction selected or used by Contractor, for security or safety at the Site, for safety precautions and programs incident to Contractor’s Work, nor for any failure of Contractor to comply with Laws and Regulations applicable to Contractor’s furnishing and performing the Work. Accordingly, DOWL neither guarantees the performance of any Contractor nor assumes responsibility for any Contractor’s failure to furnish or perform the Work in accordance with the Contract Documents. c.For the purpose of budgeting, a total of two (2) engineer site visits are assumed for each project. 5.Task 440 – Quality Assurance: It is assumed that the Contractor will complete Quality Control testing as specified and required in the project specifications. DOWL will assist the City of Bozeman in reviewing the Contractor’s quality control test results, visual leak detection and placement of flowable fill. For the purpose of budgeting, a total of 5-manhours are assumed for the completion of this task for both sites. 6.Task(s) 450 – Defective Work: Reject Work if, on the basis of Engineer’s observations, Engineer believes that such Work (a) is defective under the standards set forth in the Contract Documents, (b) will not produce a completed Project that conforms to the Contract Documents, or (c) will imperil the integrity of the design concept of the completed Project as a functioning whole as indicated by the Contract Documents. 7.Task(s) 450 – Clarifications, Interpretations, Field Orders: Issue necessary clarifications and interpretations of the Contract Documents as appropriate to the orderly completion of Contractor’s work. Such clarifications and interpretations will be consistent with the intent of and reasonably inferable from the Contract Documents. Subject to any limitations in the Contract Documents, Engineer may issue field orders authorizing minor variations in the Work from the requirements of the Contract Documents. 8.Task(s) 450 – Change Orders and Work Change Directives: Recommend change orders and work change directives to Owner, as appropriate, and prepare change orders and work change directives as required. 9.Task(s) 460 – Substantial Completion: Promptly after notice from Contractor that Contractor considers the entire Work ready for its intended use, in company with Owner and Contractor, visit the Project to determine if the Work is substantially complete. If after considering any objections of Owner, Engineer considers the Work substantially complete, Engineer shall deliver a certificate of Substantial Completion to Owner for final processing. 10.Task(s) 460 – Final Notice of Acceptability of the Work: Conduct a final visit to the Project to determine if the completed Work of Contractor is acceptable so that Engineer may recommend, in writing, final payment to Contractor. 11.Task 460 – Post Construction Activities: 220 Task Order #08, Exhibit A – Scope of Services Peach and Tamarack Stormwater Treatment Improvements Page 6 a.Record Drawings: DOWL will develop record drawings incorporating any field changes or updates to as-recorded information. b.Post Construction Walk-through(s): DOWL, together with the City of Bozeman, will visit the Project to observe any apparent defects in the Work, assist City in consultations and discussions with Contractor concerning correction of any such defects, and make recommendations as to replacement or correction of defective Work, if any. c.Warranty Walk-through: DOWL, together with the City of Bozeman, will participate in a Two-Year Warranty Walk-through inspection of the Project to observe any apparent defects in the Work, assist the City in consultations and discussions with Contractor concerning correction of any such defects, and make recommendations as to replacement or correction of defective Work, if needed. Task 5.Construction Inspection 1.Task 500 – Resident Project Representative (RPR) a.Provide the services of an RPR at the Site to assist the Engineer and to provide more extensive observation of Contractor’s work. Duties, responsibilities, and authority of the RPR are as set forth in Attachment 3. The furnishing of such RPR’s services will not limit, extend, or modify Engineer’s responsibilities or authority except as expressly set forth in Attachment3. b.Duration of Construction Phase and Timing/Number of RPRs Expected Site Visits: The Construction Phase will commence with the execution of the first Construction Contract for the Project or any part thereof and will terminate upon written recommendation by Engineer for final payment to Contractor(s). Subject to the provisions of Attachment 1, Engineer shall be entitled to an equitable increase in compensation if Construction Phase services (including Resident Project Representative services, if any) are required after the original date for completion and readiness for final payment of Contractor as set forth herein or in the Construction Contract. i.East Tamarack Street Treatment Unit: The anticipated duration of on-site activities is estimated at a maximum of 20 calendar days, RPR services are as indicated in Attachment 3.DOWL will provide RPR services for the following construction activities/milestones: 1.Meet with Contractor on-site to discuss schedule, project layout, and observe traffic control and initial excavation. (1 site visit) 2.Observe subgrade preparation and Contractor -established elevation of prepared subgrade. (1 site visit) 3.Observe placement of manhole and pipe connections prior to backfill to discuss planned backfill operations with the Contractor (1 site visit) 4.Observe backfill placement for lower lifts, up to inlet subgrade elevation (1 site visit) 5.Observe backfill placement for upper lifts around pipe connections and observe Contractor-established finished grade elevations and planned pipe restraints (1 site visit) 6.Observe installation of asphalt surfacing (1 site visit) 7.Post construction activities (1 site visit) ii.East Peach Street Treatment Unit: The anticipated duration of on-site construction activities is estimated at a maximum of 20 calendar days, RPR services are as indicated in Attachment 3.DOWL will provide RPR services for the following construction activities/milestones: 221 Task Order #08, Exhibit A – Scope of Services Peach and Tamarack Stormwater Treatment Improvements Page 7 1.Meet with Contractor on-site to discuss schedule, project layout, and observe traffic control and initial excavation. (1 site visit) 2.Observe subgrade preparation and Contractor -established elevation of prepared subgrade. (1 site visit) 3.Observe placement of manhole and pipe connections prior to backfill to discuss planned backfill operations with the Contractor (1 site visit) 4.Observe backfill placement for lower lifts, up to inlet subgrade elevation (1 site visit) 5.Observe backfill placement for upper lifts around pipe connections and observe Contractor-established finished grade elevations and planned pipe restraints (1 site visit) 6.Observe installation of asphalt surfacing (1 site visit) 7.Post construction activities (1 site visit) iii.To facilitate public communication and coordination with DOWL within a normal workday duration, it is proposed for consideration to require construction working hours from 8 A.M. to 5 P.M. c.Limitation of Responsibilities: Engineer shall not be responsible for the acts or omissions of any Contractor, Subcontractor or Supplier, or other individuals or entities performing or furnishing any of the Work, for safety or security at the Site, or for safety precautions and programs incident to Contractor's Work, during the Construction Phase or otherwise. Engineer shall not be responsible for the failure of any Contractor to perform or furnish the Work in accordance with the Contract Documents. Compensation 1.Basic Services: Table 2 outlines DOWL’s estimated fee for the proposed Scope of Services. Given the variable nature of the services potentially required, it is anticipated that this task order will be managed on a Time and Materials basis. The distribution of fees between individual tasks may be altered to be consistent with the services actually rendered, but the total compensation will not be exceeded without prior written consent of the City of Bozeman. Table 2 – Task Order #08 Compensation Task Description Estimated Fee Task 1 – Preliminary Project Design $ 29,000.00 Task 2 – Project Design and Construction Documents $ 35,400.00 Task 3 – Assistance During Bidding and Contract Award $ 4,600.00 Task 4 –Construction Administration $ 16,200.00 Estimated Total Fee $ 85,200.00 2.Resident Project Representative – Standard Hourly Rates a.Owner shall pay Engineer for Resident Project Representative Basic Services as follows: i.Resident Project Representative Services: For services of Engineer’s Resident Project Representative under Task 5 of this Exhibit A, an amount equal to the cumulative hours charged to the Project by each class of Engineer’s personnel times Standard Hourly Rates for each applicable billing class at the rates set forth in Attachment 2 to this 222 Task Order #08, Exhibit A – Scope of Services Peach and Tamarack Stormwater Treatment Improvements Page 8 Exhibit A for all Resident Project Representative services performed on the Project, plus related Reimbursable Expenses and Engineer’s Consultant’s charges, if any. 1.East Tamarack Street Stormwater Treatment Unit: The total compensation under this Paragraph is estimated to be $ 5,900.00 based upon periodic RPR services at the key construction activities described above over a 20-calendar day construction schedule. 2.East Peach Street Stormwater Treatment Unit: The total compensation under this Paragraph is estimated to be $ 5,900.00 based upon periodic RPR services at the key construction activities described above over a 20-calendar day construction schedule. b.Compensation for Reimbursable Expenses: i.For those Reimbursable Expenses that are not accounted for in the compensation for Basic Services under 2.a.i. Resident Project Representative Services above, and are directly related to the provision of Resident Project Representative Basic Services, Owner shall pay Engineer at the rates set forth in Attachment 2 to this Exhibit A. 3.Additional Services – Standard Hourly Rates a.Owner shall pay Engineer for Additional Services, if any, as follows: i.For services of Engineer’s personnel engaged directly on the Project pursuant to Attachment 1, Additional Services Requiring Owner’s Written Authorization of Exhibit A, an amount equal to that separately negotiated for the Additional Services based on the nature of the required Additional Services. ii.For services of Engineer’s personnel engaged directly on the Project pursuant to Attachment 1 Additional Services Not Requiring Owner’s Written Authorization an amount equal to the cumulative hours charged to the Project by each class of Engineer’s personnel times Standard Hourly Rates for each applicable billing class, plus related Reimbursable Expenses and Engineer’s Consultant’s charges, if any. b.Other Provisions Concerning Payment of Additional Services: i.Whenever Engineer is entitled to compensation for the charges of Engineer’s Consultants, those charges shall be the amounts billed by Engineer’s Consultants to Engineer times a factor of 1.10. ii.The amounts payable to Engineer for Reimbursable Expenses, if any, will be the related internal expenses actually incurred or allocated by Engineer, plus all invoiced external Reimbursable Expenses allocable to such Additional Services, the latter multiplied by a factor of 1.10. 223 Attachment 1 to Exhibit A Professional Services Contract January 2023 Page 1 of 3 This is Attachment 1, consisting of 3 pages, referred to in and part of the Exhibit A Task Order 08 of the Agreement between Owner and DOWL for Professional Services dated September 16, 2019. Project No: Additional Services 1.01 Additional Services Requiring Owner’s Written Authorization A.If authorized in writing by Owner, Engineer shall furnish or obtain from others Additional Services of the types listed below. 1.Preparation of applications and supporting documents (in addition to those furnished under Basic Services) for private or governmental grants, loans, or advances in connection with the Project; preparation or review of environmental assessments and impact statements; review and evaluation of the effects on the design requirements for the Project of any such statements and documents prepared by others; and assistance in obtaining approvals of authorities having jurisdiction over the anticipated environmental impact of the Project. 2.Services to make measured drawings of or to investigate existing conditions or facilities, or to verify the accuracy of drawings or other information furnished by Owner or others. 3.Services resulting from significant changes in the scope, extent, or character of the portions of the Project designed or specified by Engineer or its design requirements including, but not limited to, changes in size, complexity, Owner’s schedule, character of construction, or method of financing; and revising previously accepted studies, reports, Drawings, Specifications, or Contract Documents when such revisions are required by changes in Laws and Regulations enacted subsequent to the Effective Date or are due to any other causes beyond Engineer’s control. 4.Services resulting from Owner’s request to evaluate additional Study and Report Phase alternative solutions beyond those identified in Exhibit A Basic Services, if any. 5.Services required as a result of Owner’s providing incomplete or incorrect Project information to Engineer. 6.Providing renderings or models for Owner’s use. 7.Undertaking investigations and studies including, but not limited to, detailed consideration of operations, maintenance, and overhead expenses; the preparation of financial feasibility and cash flow studies, rate schedules, and appraisals; assistance in obtaining financing for the Project; evaluating processes available for licensing, and assisting Owner in obtaining process licensing; detailed quantity surveys of materials, equipment, and labor; and audits or inventories required in connection with construction performed by Owner. 224 Attachment 1 to Exhibit A Professional Services Contract January 2023 Page 2 of 3 8.Furnishing services of Consultants for other than Exhibit A Basic Services. 9.Services attributable to more prime construction contracts than specified in Exhibit A, Basic Services, if any. 10.If not required as part of Basic Services defined in Exhibit A, preparing for, coordinating with, participating in and responding to structured independent review processes, including, but not limited to, construction management, cost estimating, project peer review, value engineering, and constructability review requested by Owner; and performing or furnishing services required to revise studies, reports, Drawings, Specifications, or other Bidding Documents as a result of such review processes. 11.If not required as part of Basic Services defined in Exhibit A above, preparing additional Bidding Documents or Contract Documents for alternate bids or prices requested by Owner for the Work or a portion thereof. 12.Assistance in connection with Bid protests, rebidding, or renegotiating contracts for construction, materials, equipment, or services. 13.Providing construction surveys and staking to enable Contractor to perform its work other than as required under Exhibit A, Basic Services, including any type of property surveys or related engineering services needed for the transfer of interests in real property; and providing other special field surveys. 14.Providing Construction Phase services beyond the original date for completion and readiness for final payment of Contractor. 15.Providing assistance in responding to the presence of any Constituent of Concern at the Site, in compliance with current Laws and Regulations. 16.If not required as part of Basic Services defined in Exhibit A, preparing Record Drawings showing appropriate record information based on Project annotated record documents received from Contractor, and furnishing such Record Drawings to Owner. 17.If not required as part of Basic Services defined in Exhibit A, preparation of operation and maintenance manuals. 18.Preparing to serve or serving as a consultant or witness for Owner in any litigation, arbitration, or other dispute resolution process related to the Project. 19.Providing more extensive services required to enable Engineer to issue notices or certifications requested by Owner other than those required under Exhibit A, Basic Services. 20.If not required as part of Basic Services defined in Exhibit A, assistance in connection with the adjusting of Project equipment and systems. 21.If not required as part of Basic Services defined in Exhibit A, assistance to Owner in training Owner’s staff to operate and maintain Project equipment and systems. 225 Attachment 1 to Exhibit A Professional Services Contract January 2023 Page 3 of 3 22.If not required as part of Basic Services defined in Exhibit A, assistance to Owner in developing procedures for (a) control of the operation and maintenance of Project equipment and systems, and (b) related record-keeping. 23.If not required as part of Basic Services defined in Exhibit A, overtime work requiring higher than regular rates. 24.Other services performed or furnished by Engineer not otherwise provided for in this Agreement. 1.02 Additional Services Not Requiring Owner’s Written Authorization A.Engineer shall advise Owner in advance that Engineer will immediately commence to perform or furnish the Additional Services of the types listed below. For such Additional Services, Engineer need not request or obtain specific advance written authorization from Owner. Engineer shall cease performing or furnishing such Additional Services upon receipt of written notice from Owner. 25.Additional or extended services during construction made necessary by (1) emergencies or acts of God endangering the Work (advance notice not required), (2) the presence at the Site of any Constituent of Concern or items of historical or cultural significance, (3) Work damaged by fire or other cause during construction, (4) a significant amount of defective, neglected, or delayed work by Contractor, (5) acceleration of the progress schedule involving services beyond normal working hours, or (6) default by Contractor. 26.Services (other than Basic Services during the Post-Construction Phase) in connection with any partial utilization of any part of the Work by Owner prior to Substantial Completion. 27.Evaluating an unreasonable claim or an excessive number of claims submitted by Contractor or others in connection with the Work. 28.Services during the Construction Phase rendered after the original date for completion of the Work referred to above. 29.Reviewing a Shop Drawing more than three times, as a result of repeated inadequate submissions by Contractor. 226 This is Attachment 2, consisting of 4 pages, referred to in and part of the Exhibit A Task Order 08 of the Agreement between Owner and DOWL for Professional Services dated September 16, 2019. Project No: DOWL Montana Fee Schedule 227 Effective July 3, 2022 Until Further Notice 1 | Page MONTANA FEE SCHEDULE Personnel Billing Rates Personnel are identified on our invoices by name and/or labor category. Description Rate Description Rate Accounting Manager $170 Accounting Technician $105 Administrative Assistant $80 Administrative Manager $110 Biologist I $115 Biologist II $125 Biologist III $135 Biologist IV $145 Biologist V $190 CAD Drafter I $90 CAD Drafter II $105 CAD Drafter III $115 CAD Drafter IV $125 CAD Drafter V $135 Civil and Transportation Designer $120 Contract Administrator I $145 Contract Administrator II $170 Corporate Development Manager $215 Cultural Resources Specialist I $105 Cultural Resources Specialist II $125 Cultural Resources Specialist III $130 Cultural Resources Specialist IV $165 Cultural Resources Specialist V $180 Document Production Supervisor $135 Engineer I $115 Engineer II $125 Engineer III $140 Engineer IV $160 Engineer V $180 Engineer VI $190 Engineer VII $200 Engineer VIII $210 Engineer IX $235 Engineer X $250 Engineering Technician I $85 Engineering Technician II $100 Engineering Technician III $110 Engineering Technician IV $125 Engineering Technician V $140 Engineering Technician VI $160 Environmental Specialist I $105 Environmental Specialist II $120 Environmental Specialist III $125 Environmental Specialist IV $135 Environmental Specialist V $140 Environmental Specialist VI $175 Environmental Specialist VII $195 Environmental Specialist VIII $210 Environmental Specialist IX $230 Environmental Specialist X $250 Field Project Representative I $100 Field Project Representative II $110 Field Project Representative III $140 Field Project Representative IV $155 Geologist I $120 Geologist II $130 Geologist III $140 Geologist IV $160 Geologist V $190 GIS Coordinator $155 GIS Manager $165 GIS Specialist $110 GIS Technician $90 Graphics Designer $115 Intern I $70 Intern II $90 Laboratory Manager $110 Laboratory Supervisor $90 228 Effective July 3, 2022 Until Further Notice 2 | Page Landscape Architect I $115 Landscape Architect II $130 Landscape Architect III $145 Landscape Architect IV $160 Landscape Architect V $175 Landscape Architect VI $185 Landscape Architect VII $195 Landscape Designer $100 Landscape Planner $120 Lead Materials Technician $100 Marketing & Administrative Manager $210 Marketing Assistant $90 Marketing Coordinator $120 Materials Manager $115 Materials Technician $75 Materials Technician II $85 Planner I $105 Planner II $130 Planner III $145 Planner IV $160 Planner V $175 Planner VI $185 Planner VII $195 Planner VIII $210 Planner IX $225 Planner X $265 Planning Technician $95 Professional Land Surveyor I $105 Professional Land Surveyor II $115 Professional Land Surveyor III $125 Professional Land Surveyor IV $135 Professional Land Surveyor V $145 Professional Land Surveyor VI $150 Professional Land Surveyor VII $160 Professional Land Surveyor VIII $170 Professional Land Surveyor IX $195 Professional Land Surveyor X $205 Professional Land Surveyor XI $230 Project Administrator $120 Project Assistant I $100 Project Assistant II $115 Project Controller $150 Project Manager I $145 Project Manager II $160 Project Manager III $175 Project Manager IV $190 Project Manager V $205 Project Manager VI $220 Project Manager VII $235 Proposal Manager $125 Public Involvement Assistant $100 Public Involvement Coordinator $140 Public Involvement Planner $120 Public Involvement Program Manager $185 Real Estate Services Manager $165 Right of Way Agent I $110 Right of Way Agent II $125 Right of Way Agent III $140 Right of Way Agent IV $155 Right of Way Agent V $170 Right of Way Agent VI $200 Right of Way Assistant $100 Risk Manager $185 Senior CAD Drafter $155 Senior Civil and Transportation Designer $155 Senior Graphics Designer $150 Senior Manager I $225 Senior Manager II $245 Senior Manager III $255 Senior Manager IV $290 Senior Manager V $300 Senior Manager VI $320 Senior Materials Technician $105 Senior Project Controller $170 Senior Proposal Manager $195 Survey Technician -- Supervisor $140 Survey Technician I $75 Survey Technician II $80 Survey Technician III $85 Survey Technician IV $100 229 Effective July 3, 2022 Until Further Notice 3 | Page Survey Technician V $105 Survey Technician VI $115 Survey Technician VII $130 Survey Technician VIII $145 Survey Technician IX $155 Systems Administrator $140 Technical Coordinator $165 Survey Crews One-Person Survey Crew = $145 /hour One-Person Survey Crew GPS/ Robotics = $165 /hour Two-Person Survey Crew = $210 /hour Two-Person Survey Crew GPS/ Robotics = $220 /hour Two-Person Survey Crew (PLS + LSIT) = $245 /hour Three-Person Survey Crew = $295 /hour Travel, Mileage, & Miscellaneous Lodging = Cost per night Airfare = Cost Vehicle Usage – Passenger Cars = 1.00/mile Vehicle Usage – Trucks & SUV’s = 1.20/mile Printing/Supplies/Phone/Fax/Postage = Note 3 In-House Usage Charges = Note 4 Per Diem Unless otherwise specified contractually, per diem will be billed when travel is more than 50 miles from the office during a meal allowance period of three or more consecutive hours or involves an overnight stay. The three meal allowance periods are breakfast (midnight to 10 am), lunch (10 am – 3 pm) and dinner (3 pm to midnight). Breakfast Lunch Dinner Incidentals 1st and Last Day GSA Per Diem Rate Billings $13.00 $15.00 $26.00 $5.00 $44.25 $59.00 Bozeman $18.00 $20.00 $36.00 $5.00 $59.25 $79.00 Helena $14.00 $16.00 $29.00 $5.00 $48.00 $64.00 All other cities not listed above, please use the following link: https://www.gsa.gov/travel/plan-book/per-diem-rates Please use the following link for the meal breakdown: https://www.gsa.gov/travel/plan-book/per-diem-rates/meals-and-incidental-expenses-mie-breakdown 230 Effective July 3, 2022 Until Further Notice 4 | Page Notes 1. DOWL’s Professional Services Fee Schedule is subject to adjustment each year or at the end of a contract period, whichever is appropriate. Should adjustments be anticipated or required, such adjustments will not affect existing contracts without prior agreement between Client and DOWL. 2. Straight-time rates are given. Multiply by 1.5 for overtime rates. Overtime rates will be applied at the rate prescribed by applicable state law. 3. Direct reimbursable expenses such as travel, freight, subcontractors, and request beyond those requests considered reasonable by the Project Manager for phone/fax/postage, office supplies, reproduction and photography, and laboratory analysis will be billed at cost plus the negotiated markup. 4. In-house equipment usage charges or specialized software/equipment that are not separately stated on the fee schedule will be negotiated at rates deemed fair and reasonable. 5. Late charges will be assessed on the unpaid balance of all accounts not paid within 30 days of the billing date, at a rate of 1.0 percent per month (12% per year). 231 Attachment 3 to Exhibit A Professional Services Contract January 2023 Page 1 of 5 This is Attachment 3, consisting of 5 pages, referred to in and part of the Exhibit A Task Order 08 of the Agreement between Owner and DOWL for Professional Services dated September 16, 2019. Project No: Duties, Responsibilities, and Limitations of Authority of Resident Project Representative Task 5 – Construction Inspection of Exhibit A to the Agreement is supplemented to include the following agreement of the parties: 1.01 Resident Project Representative A.Engineer shall furnish a Resident Project Representative (“RPR”) to assist Engineer in observing progress and quality of the Work. The RPR may provide full time representation or may provide representation to a lesser degree. B.Through RPR's observations of Contractor’s work in progress and field checks of materials and equipment, Engineer shall endeavor to provide further protection for Owner against defects and deficiencies in the Work. However, Engineer shall not, during such RPR field checks or as a result of such RPR observations of Contractor’s work in progress, supervise, direct, or have control over Contractor’s Work, nor shall Engineer (including the RPR) have authority over or responsibility for the means, methods, techniques, sequences, or procedures of construction selected or used by any contractor, for security or safety at the Site, for safety precautions and programs incident to any contractor’s work in progress, or for any failure of a contractor to comply with Laws and Regulations applicable to such contractor’s performing and furnishing of its work. The Engineer (including RPR) neither guarantees the performances of any contractor nor assumes responsibility for Contractor’s failure to furnish and perform the Work in accordance with the Contract Documents. In addition, the specific terms set forth in Task 4 of Exhibit A of the Agreement are applicable. C.The duties and responsibilities of the RPR are as follows: 1.General: RPR is Engineer’s representative at the Site, will act as directed by and under the supervision of Engineer, and will confer with Engineer regarding RPR’s actions. RPR’s dealings in matters pertaining to the Contractor’s work in progress shall in general be with Engineer and Contractor. RPR’s dealings with Subcontractors shall only be through or with the full knowledge and approval of Contractor. RPR shall generally communicate with Owner only with the knowledge of and under the direction of Engineer. 232 Attachment 3 to Exhibit A Professional Services Contract January 2023 Page 2 of 5 2.Schedules: Review the progress schedule, schedule of Shop Drawing and Sample submittals, and schedule of values prepared by Contractor and consult with Engineer concerning acceptability. 3.Conferences and Meetings: Attend meetings with Contractor, such as preconstruction conferences, progress meetings, job conferences and other project-related meetings, and prepare and circulate copies of minutes thereof. 4.Liaison: a.Serve as Engineer’s liaison with Contractor. Working principally through Contractor’s authorized representative or designee, assist in providing information regarding the intent of the Contract Documents. b.Assist Engineer in serving as Owner’s liaison with Contractor when Contractor’s operations affect Owner’s on-Site operations. c.Assist in obtaining from Owner additional details or information, when required for proper execution of the Work. 5.Interpretation of Contract Documents: Report to Engineer when clarifications and interpretations of the Contract Documents are needed and transmit to Contractor clarifications and interpretations as issued by Engineer. 6.Shop Drawings and Samples: a.Record date of receipt of Samples and approved Shop Drawings. b.Receive Samples which are furnished at the Site by Contractor, and notify Engineer of availability of Samples for examination. c.Advise Engineer and Contractor of the commencement of any portion of the Work requiring a Shop Drawing or Sample submittal for which RPR believes that the submittal has not been approved by Engineer. 7.Modifications: Consider and evaluate Contractor’s suggestions for modifications in Drawings or Specifications and report such suggestions, together with RPR’s recommendations, to Engineer. Transmit to Contractor in writing decisions as issued by Engineer. 8.Review of Work and Rejection of Defective Work: a.Conduct on-Site observations of Contractor’s work in progress to assist Engineer in determining if the Work is in general proceeding in accordance with the Contract Documents. 233 Attachment 3 to Exhibit A Professional Services Contract January 2023 Page 3 of 5 b.Report to Engineer whenever RPR believes that any part of Contractor’s work in progress will not produce a completed Project that conforms generally to the Contract Documents or will imperil the integrity of the design concept of the completed Project as a functioning whole as indicated in the Contract Documents, or has been damaged, or does not meet the requirements of any inspection, test or approval required to be made; and advise Engineer of that part of work in progress that RPR believes should be corrected or rejected or should be uncovered for observation, or requires special testing, inspection, or approval. 9.Inspections, Tests, and System Start-ups: a.Consult with Engineer in advance of scheduled inspections, tests, and systems start-ups. b.Verify that tests, equipment, and systems start-ups and operating and maintenance training are conducted in the presence of appropriate Owner’s personnel, and that Contractor maintains adequate records thereof. c.Observe, record, and report to Engineer appropriate details relative to the test procedures and systems start-ups. d.Accompany visiting inspectors representing public or other agencies having jurisdiction over the Project, record the results of these inspections, and report to Engineer. 10.Records: a.Maintain at the Site orderly files for correspondence, reports of job conferences, reproductions of original Contract Documents including all change orders, field orders, work change directives, addenda, additional Drawings issued subsequent to the execution of the Construction Contract, Engineer’s clarifications and interpretations of the Contract Documents, progress reports, Shop Drawing and Sample submittals received from and delivered to Contractor, and other Project-related documents. b.Prepare a daily report or keep a diary or log book, recording Contractor’s hours on the Site, weather conditions, data relative to questions of change orders, field orders, work change directives, or changed conditions, Site visitors, daily activities, decisions, observations in general, and specific observations in more detail as in the case of observing test procedures; and send copies to Engineer. c.Record names, addresses, fax numbers, e-mail addresses, web site locations, and telephone numbers of all Contractors, Subcontractors, and major Suppliers of materials and equipment. 234 Attachment 3 to Exhibit A Professional Services Contract January 2023 Page 4 of 5 d.Maintain records for use in preparing Project documentation. e.Upon completion of the Work, furnish original set of all RPR Project documentation to Engineer. 11.Reports: a.Furnish to Engineer periodic reports as required of progress of the Work and of Contractor’s compliance with the progress schedule and schedule of Shop Drawing and Sample submittals. b.Draft and recommend to Engineer proposed change orders, work change directives, and field orders. Obtain backup material from Contractor. c.Furnish to Engineer and Owner copies of all inspection, test, and system start-up reports. d.Immediately notify Engineer of the occurrence of any Site accidents, emergencies, acts of God endangering the Work, damage to property by fire or other causes, or the discovery of any Constituent of Concern. 12.Payment Requests: Review applications for payment with Contractor for compliance with the established procedure for their submission and forward with recommendations to Engineer, noting particularly the relationship of the payment requested to the schedule of values, Work completed, and materials and equipment delivered at the Site but not incorporated in the Work. 13.Certificates, Operation and Maintenance Manuals: During the course of the Work, verify that materials and equipment certificates, operation and maintenance manuals and other data required by the Contract Documents to be assembled and furnished by Contractor are applicable to the items actually installed and in accordance with the Contract Documents, and have these documents delivered to Engineer for review and forwarding to Owner prior to payment for that part of the Work. 14.Completion: a.Participate in visits to the Project to determine Substantial Completion, assist in the determination of Substantial Completion and the preparation of lists of items to be completed or corrected. b.Participate in a final visit to the Project in the company of Engineer, Owner, and Contractor, and prepare a final list of items to be completed and deficiencies to be remedied. c.Observe whether all items on the final list have been completed or corrected and make recommendations to Engineer concerning acceptance. 235 Attachment 3 to Exhibit A Professional Services Contract January 2023 Page 5 of 5 D.Resident Project Representative shall not: 1.Authorize any deviation from the Contract Documents or substitution of materials or equipment (including “or-equal” items). 2.Exceed limitations of Engineer’s authority as set forth in this Agreement. 3.Undertake any of the responsibilities of Contractor, Subcontractors or Suppliers. 4.Advise on, issue directions relative to, or assume control over any aspect of the means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures of Contractor’s work. 5.Advise on, issue directions regarding, or assume control over security or safety practices, precautions, and programs in connection with the activities or operations of Owner or Contractor. 6.Participate in specialized field or laboratory tests or inspections conducted off-site by others except as specifically authorized by Engineer. 7.Accept shop drawing or sample submittals from anyone other than Contractor. 8.Authorize Owner to occupy the Project in whole or in part. 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 1st AMENDMENT TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT THIS 1st AMENDMENT TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR ON- CALL PLANNING, ENGINEERING, AND CONSTRUCTION OVERSIGHT SERVICES FOR A VARIETY OF STORMWATER DIVISION INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS dated September 16th, 2019 (the “Agreement”) is made and entered into this _____ day of ____________, 2022, by and between the CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, a self-governing municipal corporation organized and existing under its Charter and the laws of the State of Montana, 121 North Rouse Street, Bozeman, Montana, with a mailing address of PO Box 1230, Bozeman, MT 59771, hereinafter referred to as “City,” and DOWL, LLC, hereinafter referred to as “Contractor.” In consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements herein contained, the receipt and sufficiency whereof being hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree to amend the Agreement as follows: 1.Extension of Term. Section 30 of the Agreement is extended for an additional one (1) year period. The Agreement shall terminate on September 16th, 2023. 2.Nondiscrimination and Equal Pay: Section 14 of the Agreement is replaced in its entirety with the following: The Contractor agrees that all hiring by Contractor of persons performing this Agreement shall be on the basis of merit and qualifications. The Contractor will have a policy to provide equal employment opportunity in accordance with all applicable state and federal anti-discrimination laws, regulations, and contracts. The Contractor will not refuse employment to a person, bar a person from employment, or discriminate against a person in compensation or in a term, condition, or privilege of employment because of race, color, religion, creed, political ideas, sex, age, marital status, national origin, actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender identity, physical or mental disability, except when the reasonable demands of the position require an age, physical or mental disability, marital status or sex distinction. The Contractor shall be subject to and comply with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; Section 140, Title 2, United States Code, and all regulations promulgated thereunder. DocuSign Envelope ID: 057D23E2-F3C7-4201-96C3-0E79C423CAA4 23 August 249 Contractor represents it is, and for the term of this Agreement will be, in compliance with the requirements of the Equal Pay Act of 1963 and Section 39-3-104, MCA (the Montana Equal Pay Act). Contractor must report to the City any violations of the Montana Equal Pay Act that Contractor has been found guilty of within 60 days of such finding for violations occurring during the term of this Agreement. Contractor shall require these nondiscrimination terms of its subcontractors providing services under this Agreement. 3. Agreement still valid. All remaining terms and provisions of the Agreement remain valid. **** END OF AGREEMENT EXCEPT FOR SIGNATURES **** DocuSign Envelope ID: 057D23E2-F3C7-4201-96C3-0E79C423CAA4 250 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this instrument the day and year first above written. CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA DOWL, LLC By________________________________ By_____________________________ Jeff Mihelich, City Manager Print Name: Title: APPROVED AS TO FORM By_______________________________ Greg Sullivan, Bozeman City Attorney DocuSign Envelope ID: 057D23E2-F3C7-4201-96C3-0E79C423CAA4 Wade Irion Water Practice Lead 251 Memorandum REPORT TO:City Commission FROM:Tom Rogers, Senior Planner Anna Bentley, Community Development Director SUBJECT:Reconsideration of the Cloverleaf Zone Map Amendment Decision; the Cloverleaf Zone Map Amendment Requested Amending the City Zoning Map for a City Block Bounded by East Cottonwood Street, Ida Avenue, East Peach Street, and Plum Avenue Consisting of Approximately 3.1995 Acres and the Accompanying Adjacent Rights-of way from NEHMU (Northeast Historic Mixed Use) to B-2M (Community Business District Mixed) MEETING DATE:February 14, 2023 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Community Development - Legislative RECOMMENDATION:I move to reconsider the Cloverleaf Zone Map Amendment and direct staff to notice a public hearing to the same. STRATEGIC PLAN:4.2 High Quality Urban Approach: Continue to support high-quality planning, ranging from building design to neighborhood layouts, while pursuing urban approaches to issues such as multimodal transportation, infill, density, connected trails and parks, and walkable neighborhoods. BACKGROUND:On November 1, 2022 and continued on November 22, 2022 the Bozeman City Commission considered the aforementioned application. After considering the staff report, application materials, public comment, recommendation of the Zoning Commission, and all information presented for application 22218 they voted (2:3) to approve the requested zoning change. The motion failed. A full recording of the review and decision can be reviewed at the following video link. https://bozeman.granicus.com/player/clip/1920? view_id=1&redirect=true&h=3cd5302afca8f59eefe0848091c98be2 The City Commission’s rules of procedure authorize the Commission to reconsider previous decisions. Pursuant to the last sentence of 2.02.100.D, BMC, reconsideration of a previous decision must be a two part process. The last sentence of this section states, “Nothing herein shall be construed to prevent any commissioner from making or remaking the same or any other motion at a subsequent meeting of the commission, but the matter must be duly scheduled as an agenda item.” Therefore, the Commission must first determine whether it desires to reconsider the previous decision. This is the action proposed in this item. If a majority of the Commission determines to 252 reconsider (i.e., if a majority of the Commission approves this consent item) then staff will publicly notice the hearing where a decision on the zone map amendment application can be made. Based on stated City Commission priorities, City staff is suggesting an opportunity to reconsider this decision. If the Commission votes to revisit this decision, the March 28, 2023 agenda is scheduled for the reconsideration. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:Whether or not the City Commission should reconsider their decision not to approve the Cloverleaf Zone Map Amendment? ALTERNATIVES:As determined by the Commission. FISCAL EFFECTS:None Report compiled on: February 8, 2023 253 Memorandum REPORT TO:City Commission FROM:Tom Rogers, Senior Planner Anna Bentley, Community Development Director SUBJECT:1603 Bridger Drive Annexation and Zone Map Amendment Establishing Initial Zoning of R-2 , Residential Moderate Density, for a Property Addressed at 1603 Bridger Drive on Approximately 0.7417 Acres Located North of Bridger Drive Approximately One-third of a Mile East of Story Mill Road, Application 22247 MEETING DATE:February 14, 2023 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Community Development - Legislative RECOMMENDATION:City Commission Recommended Annexation Motion: Having reviewed and considered the staff report, application materials, public comment, and all information presented, I here-by adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application 22247 and move to approve the 1603 Bridger Drive Annexation with recommended terms of annexation, and direct staff to prepare an annexation agreement for signature by the parties. City Commission Recommended Zoning Motion: Having reviewed and considered the staff report, application materials, public comment, recommendation of the Zoning Commission, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff re- port for application 22247 and move to approve the 1603 Bridger Drive Zone Map Amendment, with contingencies required to complete the application processing. STRATEGIC PLAN:4.2 High Quality Urban Approach: Continue to support high-quality planning, ranging from building design to neighborhood layouts, while pursuing urban approaches to issues such as multimodal transportation, infill, density, connected trails and parks, and walkable neighborhoods. BACKGROUND:The applicants and property owners seek to annex one parcel totaling roughly 0.7417 acres in-to the City limits and establish initial zoning of R-2, Residential Moderate Density. The property is currently zoned “Residential Suburban” within the county. Nearby municipal zoning includes Residential Single-Household Low Density (R-1) to the north and Residential Suburban (R-S) to the south. Land to the east and west is unincorporated and zoned “Residential Suburban” within the county. The future land use map in the Bozeman Community Plan 2020 designates the property as “Urban Neighborhood” which the R-2 district serves to implement. The adjacent 254 road rights-of-way was annexed with previous annexations. There is an existing home with an attached garage, and a small shed located behind the home on the east side of the parcel. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:There are no identified conflicts between the City and Applicant regarding the application at this time. ALTERNATIVES:1. Approve the application with suggested terms of annexation and contingencies necessary for processing; 2. Approve the application with modifications to the recommended zoning; 3. Deny the application based on the Commission’s findings of non- compliance with the ap-plicable criteria contained within the staff report; or 4. Open and continue the public hearing on the application, with specific direction to staff or the applicant to supply additional information or to address specific items. FISCAL EFFECTS:No unusual fiscal effects have been identified. No presently budgeted funds will be changed by this Annexation or Zone Map Amendment. Future development will incur costs and generate review according to standard City practices. Attachments: 22247 1603 Bridger Drive Annex-ZMA CC SR.pdf Report compiled on: February 1, 2023 255 Page 1 of 29 22247 Staff Report for the 1603 Bridger Drive Annexation & ZMA Public Hearings: Community Development Board acting in their capacity as the Zoning Commission (map amendment only) January 23, 2023. City Commission (Annexation and map amendment) February 14, 2023. Project Description: Annexation of 0.7417 acres and amendment of the City Zoning Map for the establishment of a zoning designation of R-2. Project Location: 1603 Bridger Drive and more accurately described as Lots 19-20, Mount Baldy Subdivision, Located in the Southeast Quarter of Section 32, Township One South (T1S), Range Six East (R6E), P.M.M., Gallatin County, MT. The annexation and zone map amendment would also apply to the streets adjacent to the property. Recommendation: Meets standards for approval with contingencies. Recommended Zoning Commission Motion: Having reviewed and considered the staff report, application materials, public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application 22247 and move to recommend approval of the 1603 Bridger Drive Zone Map Amendment, with contingencies required to complete the application processing. City Commission Recommended Annexation Motion: Having reviewed and considered the staff report, application materials, public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application 22247 and move to approve the 1603 Bridger Drive Annexation with recommended terms of annexation, and direct staff to prepare an annexation agreement for signature by the parties. City Commission Recommended Zoning Motion: Having reviewed and considered the staff report, application materials, public comment, recommendation of the Zoning Commission, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application 22247 and move to approve the 1603 Bridger Drive Zone Map Amendment, with contingencies required to complete the application processing. Report: February 1, 2023 Staff Contact: Tom Rogers, Senior Planner Agenda Item Type: Action – Legislative 256 Staff Report for the 22247; 1603 Bridger Drive Annexation & ZMA Page 2 of 29 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report is based on the application materials submitted and public comment received to date. This report addresses both the zoning amendment for Zoning Commission as well as the annexation and the zoning amendment for the City Commission. Application materials available at: https://weblink.bozeman.net/WebLink/Browse.aspx?startid=264155 Unresolved Issues There are no identified conflicts between the City and Applicant regarding the application at this time. Project Summary The applicants and property owners seek to annex one parcel totaling roughly 0.7417 acres into the City limits and establish initial zoning of R-2, Residential Moderate Density. The property is currently zoned “Residential Suburban” within the county. Nearby municipal zoning includes Residential Single-Household Low Density (R-1) to the north and Residential Suburban (R-S) to the south. Land to the east and west is unincorporated and zoned “Residential Suburban” within the county. The future land use map in the Bozeman Community Plan 2020 designates the property as “Urban Neighborhood” which the R-2 district serves to implement. The adjacent road rights-of-way was annexed with previous annexations. There is an existing home with an attached garage, and a small shed located behind the home on the east side of the parcel. The following public adopted planning documents support urban development for the subject area if development is proposed on the site: Bozeman Community Plan 2020 Gallatin County growth policy Gallatin County/Bozeman Area Plan – County neighborhood plan Transportation Master Plan 2017 – City transportation plan Greater Bozeman Area Transportation Master Plan 2007 – Gallatin County Transportation Plan Water Facility Plan 2017 – City’s plan for water system operations and expansion Wastewater Facility Plan 2015 – City’s plan for wastewater system operations and expansion Community Development Board (Zoning Commission) Summary The Community Development Board acting in their capacity as the Zoning Commission held a public hearing on January 23, 2023 and forwarded a recommendation to the City Commission to adopt the requested R-2 zoning (6:0). 257 Staff Report for the 22247; 1603 Bridger Drive Annexation & ZMA Page 3 of 29 A video recording can be viewed at the following link: https://bozeman.granicus.com/player/clip/1945 Review begins at time stamp 1:18:25 One member of the public commented on the application supporting connection city water and sewer systems. City Commission Alternatives 1. Approve the application with suggested terms of annexation and contingencies necessary for processing; 2. Approve the application with modifications to the recommended zoning; 3. Deny the application based on the Commission’s findings of non-compliance with the applicable criteria contained within the staff report; or 4. Open and continue the public hearing on the application, with specific direction to staff or the applicant to supply additional information or to address specific items. 258 Staff Report for the 22247; 1603 Bridger Drive Annexation & ZMA Page 4 of 29 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.......................................................................................................2 Unresolved Issues................................................................................................................2 Project Summary .................................................................................................................2 Community Development Board (Zoning Commission) Summary....................................2 City Commission Alternatives.............................................................................................3 SECTION 1 - MAP SERIES.....................................................................................................5 SECTION 2 - RECOMMENDED TERMS OF ANNEXATION.............................................7 SECTION 3 - RECOMMENDED CONTINGENCIES OF ZONE MAP AMENDMENT .....9 SECTION 4 – ADVISORY COMMENTS...............................................................................9 SECTION 5 - RECOMMENDATION AND FUTURE ACTIONS.......................................10 Annexation.........................................................................................................................10 Zone Map Amendment......................................................................................................10 SECTION 6 - ANNEXATION STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS.................................10 SECTION 7 - ZONE MAP AMENDMENT STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS............17 PROTEST NOTICE FOR ZONING AMENDMENTS..........................................................27 APPENDIX A - NOTICING AND PUBLIC COMMENT.....................................................27 APPENDIX B - PROJECT GROWTH POLICY AND PROPOSED ZONING....................28 APPENDIX C - OWNER INFORMATION AND REVIEWING STAFF.............................28 FISCAL EFFECTS..................................................................................................................29 ATTACHMENTS....................................................................................................................29 259 Page 5 of 29 SECTION 1 - MAP SERIES Project Vicinity Map Project Vicinity Map 260 Staff Report for the 22247; 1603 Bridger Drive Annexation & ZMA Page 6 of 29 Project Vicinity Map Showing the Bozeman Community Plan 2020 Future Land Use Map – Subject property is designated as Urban Neighborhood Project Vicinity Map Showing Near Vicinity Municipal Zoning Urban Neighborhood Community Commercial Mixed-Use Parks and Open Lands R-2 R-1 R-S Not annexed Not annexed Residential Mixed-Use No City Services Urban Neighborhood R-3 R-4 R-3 R-3 B-2M REMUR-5 Parks and Open Lands R-S REMU B-2 261 Page 7 of 29 SECTION 2 - RECOMMENDED TERMS OF ANNEXATION The following terms of annexation are recommended to enable the application to comply with the City’s Annexation Policy and the requirements of state law for the provision of services. Recommended terms of annexation: 1. The documents and exhibits to formally annex the subject property must be identified as the “1603 Bridger Drive Annexation”. 2. An Annexation Map, titled “1603 Bridger Drive Annexation Map” with a legal description of the property and any adjoining un-annexed rights-of-way and/or street access easements must be submitted by the applicant for use with the Annexation Agreement. The map must be supplied as a PDF for filing with the Annexation Agreement at the County Clerk & Recorder, and a digital copy for the City Engineer’s Office. This map must be acceptable to the Director of Public Works and City Engineer’s Office, and must be submitted with the signed Annexation Agreement. 3. The applicant must execute all contingencies and terms of said Annexation Agreement with the City of Bozeman within 60 days of the distribution of the annexation agreement from the City to the applicant or annexation approval shall be null and void. 4. The land owners and their successors must pay all fire, street, water and sewer impact fees at the time of connection; and for future development, as required by Chapter 2, Bozeman Municipal Code, or as amended at the time of application for any permit listed therein. 5. City of Bozeman Resolution 5076, Policy 1 – Bridger Drive is classified as a Principal Arterial in the Bozeman Transportation Master Plan (TMP), which has a minimum right- of-way ROW width of (110) feet. Currently, only ninety (90 feet) of ROW exists along the property frontage. An additional 15 feet of ROW must be provided along the property frontage prior to the adoption of Resolution of Annexation. The ROW must be executed using the City’s standard language. The applicant should contact the City Engineering Department to receive a copy the standard language. 6. If one does not already exist, a ten foot private utility easement must be provided along the property’s Bridger Drive frontage as well as along the future local street located at the back of the property prior to the adoption of Resolution of Annexation. The executed easement must be delivered to the City Engineering Department. The easement must be executed on the City’s standard easement form. A copy of the standard easement form may be obtained from the City Engineering Department. 7. Thirty feet (30 feet) of right-of-way (ROW) must be provided along the rear of the property prior to the adoption of Resolution of Annexation to allow the future connection of a local street. The right-of-way must be executed using the City’s standard language. 262 Staff Report for the 22247; 1603 Bridger Drive Annexation & ZMA Page 8 of 29 The applicant should contact the City Engineering Department to receive a copy the standard language. 8. If they do not already exist the applicant must provide and file with the County Clerk and Recorder's office executed Waivers of Right to Protest Creation of Special Improvement Districts (SID’s) for the following: a. Street improvements to Bridger Drive from Story Mill to Boylan Road including lighting, signalization, paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage. a. Intersection improvements to Bridger Drive and Story Mill including lighting, signalization/channelization, paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage. b. Intersection improvements to Bridger Drive and Boylan Road including lighting, signalization/channelization, paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage. The applicant may obtain a copy of the template SID waiver from the City Engineering Department. The document filed must specify that in the event an SID is not utilized for the completion of these improvements, the applicant agrees to participate in an alternate financing method for the completion of said improvements on a fair share, proportionate basis as determined by square footage of property, taxable valuation of the property, traffic contribution from the development, or a combination thereof. The applicant must provide a copy of the SID waiver filed with the County Clerk and Recorder prior to the adoption of Resolution of Annexation. 9. The Annexation Agreement must include notice that the applicant must connect to municipal services and will be responsible for installing any facilities required to provide full municipal services to the property in accordance with city policy at the time of connection. 10. The applicant must properly abandon the existing on-site septic tank and leach field prior to connection to the City sanitary sewer system. The applicant must report the abandonment to the City Water and Sewer Superintendent for inspection, and the applicant must report the abandonment to the Gallatin City County Health Department. In addition to abandonment of the septic tank and leach field, the applicant must demonstrate that the sanitary sewer service to the septic tank has been completely disconnected from the old septic system prior to connection to the City sanitary sewer system. 11. The applicant must completely disconnect the on-site well from the house prior to connection to the City water system to protect the City’s system from cross contamination. The applicant must contact the City Water and Sewer Superintendent to inspect the disconnection prior to connection of water service from the house to the City water system. 12. The applicant must contact Griffin Nielsen with the City Engineering Department to obtain an analysis of cash-in-lieu of water rights for the proposed annexation. The determined amount must be paid prior to annexation. 263 Staff Report for the 22247; 1603 Bridger Drive Annexation & ZMA Page 9 of 29 SECTION 3 - RECOMMENDED CONTINGENCIES OF ZONE MAP AMENDMENT Please note that these contingencies are necessary for the City to complete the process of the proposed amendment. These contingencies only apply in the event that the related annexation request has previously been approved. Recommended Contingencies of Approval: 1. The Ordinance for the Zone Map Amendment must not be approved until the Annexation Agreement is signed by the applicant and formally approved by the City Commission. If the Annexation Agreement is not approved, the Zone Map Amendment application is null and void. 2. All documents and exhibits necessary to establish an initial municipal zoning designation must be identified as the “1603 Bridger Drive Zone Map Amendment”. 3. The applicant must submit a zone amendment map, titled “1603 Bridger Drive Zone Map Amendment”, as PDF and a digital copy of the area to be zoned, acceptable to the Director of Public Works, which will be utilized in the preparation of the Ordinance to officially amend the City of Bozeman Zoning Map. The map must contain a metes and bounds legal description of the perimeter of the subject properties, zoning district, and total acreage of the property. 4. The Ordinance for the Zone Map Amendment shall not be drafted until the applicant provides an editable metes and bounds legal description prepared by a licensed Montana surveyor. SECTION 4 – ADVISORY COMMENTS 1. The significant distance between the existing home and the available sewer mains and available elevation drop may require a private pump system to be installed. The City does not maintain or operate private pump systems, the owner of the property will be responsible for any system. 2. Future Impact Fees - Please note that future building permit applications will require payment of the required transportation, water, sewer and fire impact fees according to the City of Bozeman adopted impact fee schedule in place at the time of building permit issuance. If you desire an estimate of the required impact fees according to current rates please contact the Department of Community Development and/or visit www.bozeman.net. 3. Upon future development of the parcel, the transfer of water rights or the payment of cash- in-lieu (CIL) of water rights must be provided per Bozeman Municipal Code 38.410.130. 264 Staff Report for the 22247; 1603 Bridger Drive Annexation & ZMA Page 10 of 29 SECTION 5 - RECOMMENDATION AND FUTURE ACTIONS Annexation The Development Review Committee (DRC) considered the annexation. The DRC did not make a formal recommendation and did not express concerns with annexation of the property. The City Commission will hold a public meeting on the annexation on February 14, 2023. The meeting will begin at 6 p.m. in the Commission Room at City Hall, 121 N. Rouse Ave, Bozeman, Montana, the City Commission will conduct a public hearing on the proposed Annexation and Zone Map Amendment application. Members of the public will also be able to participate remotely via WebEx. Instructions for joining the WebEx meeting will be included on the meeting agenda which is published on the City’s website at least 48 hours prior to the meeting. Zone Map Amendment Having considered the criteria established for a zone map amendment, the Staff finds the application meets criteria for approval as submitted. The 1603 Bridger Drive Zone Map Amendment (ZMA) is in conjunction with an annexation request. Staff’s recommendation and staff responses are predicated on approval of the annexation, application 22247. The Development Review Committee (DRC) considered the amendment. The DRC did not identify any infrastructure or regulatory constraints that would impede the approval of the Zone Map Amendment application. The Community Development Board acting in their capacity as the Zoning Commission will hold a public hearing on this ZMA on January 23, 2023 and will forward a recommendation to the Commission on the Zone Map amendment. The City Commission will hold a public hearing on the zone map amendment on February 14, 2023. The meeting will begin at 6 p.m. SECTION 6 - ANNEXATION STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS In considering applications for approval of the requested annexation, the advisory boards and City Commission shall consider the following: Commission Resolution No. 5076 Criteria In evaluating compliance with the following Goals and Policies, Staff considers the application materials, Terms of Annexation, and adopted standards of the City to determine whether the Goal or Policy can be met. 265 Staff Report for the 22247; 1603 Bridger Drive Annexation & ZMA Page 11 of 29 Commission Resolution No. 5076 Goals Goal 1: The City of Bozeman encourages annexations of land contiguous to the City. The property in question is contiguous to the City limits. The property is bounded on the north and south sides by City limits and County zoned property to the east and west. However, the property is a part of a number of properties which are wholly surrounded inholding. Goal 2: The City encourages all areas that are totally surrounded by the City to annex. The subject property is wholly surrounded. Goal 3: The City encourages all properties currently contracting with the City for City services such as water, sanitary sewer, and/or fire protection to annex. The subject property is not currently contracting for services. Goal 4: The City of Bozeman requires annexation of all land proposed for development lying within the existing and planned service area of the municipal water and sewer systems as depicted in their respective facility plans, any land proposed for development that proposes to utilize municipal water or sewer systems. The subject property lies within the planned service area of the municipal water and sewer services. Existing on-site sewer and systems are installed. As noted above, the area in question is an inholding with nearby properties currently being served by full City services included emergency services, and streets. Goal 5: The City encourages annexations within the urban area identified on the future land use map in the current Bozeman Growth Policy. As shown in Section 1, the subject property is planned as Urban Neighborhood and is within the urban area of the growth policy. See the discussion under Criterion A of Section 6 of the report for more information on the growth policy. Goal 6: The City of Bozeman encourages annexations to make the City boundaries more regular rather than creating irregular extensions which leave unannexed gaps between annexed areas or islands of annexed or unannexed land. The subject property is within a number of inholdings wholly surrounded by City Limits. Three nearby properties within the same subdivision were annexed into the City property owner’s request; one in 2018 see application 18143, another in 2021 see application 21123, and a third in currently finalizing the annexation process, see application 21147. The annexation of the subject property would further this goal. 266 Staff Report for the 22247; 1603 Bridger Drive Annexation & ZMA Page 12 of 29 Goal 7: The City of Bozeman encourages annexations which will enhance the existing traffic circulation system or provide for circulation systems that do not exist at the present time. The subject property will provide additional right of way for Bridger Drive and the unnamed road to the north, see Term of Annexation 5 and 7. No addition internal street network is required to serve the property. Goal 8: The City prefers annexation of parcels of land larger than five (5) acres in size, but will allow annexation of smaller parcels if factors such as topographic limitations, sanitary disposal needs, fire access, maintenance of public facilities, etc., justify a smaller annexation. The subject property is 0.74 acres. Goal 9: The City seeks to obtain water rights adequate for future development of the property with annexation. After annexation, the subject property will be bound to the provisions of 38.410.130 which require evaluation of water adequacy and provision of water if needed at time of development. The municipal code section requires water rights or an equivalent to be provided. Exact timing and amounts will be evaluated during development review. There are several methods to address the requirements of 38.410.130. The annexation agreement will provide notice of this requirement, see Term of Annexation 12. The landowner will consent to this requirement by signature on the annexation agreement. Goal 10: The City of Bozeman encourages annexations for City provision of clean treated water and sanitary sewer. The subject property is located within the City’s planned water and sewer service area. See Goal 4 above. The applicant proposes zoning for future development of homes. There is an existing home on the property which uses an onsite well and septic system. The annexation terms include requirements for future abandonment of the septic system and connection to the municipal sewer system. Any new construction must connect with initial construction to the municipal system. Terms of Annexation 9 - 11 address the termination of the existing on-site septic system. Exact timing will depend on the sequencing of future development. The City’s water and sewer systems are adjacent to the property. Per Term of Annexation 9, the Annexation Agreement required to finalize the requested annexation will require the applicant to design extensions of services to meet the City’s adopted infrastructure standards. These include provisions for minimum water pressure and volumes, adequate sewer flows by volume, gravity flow of sewers, and other standards necessary to protect public health and safety and ensure functional utilities. 267 Staff Report for the 22247; 1603 Bridger Drive Annexation & ZMA Page 13 of 29 Resolution No. 5076 Policies Policy 1: Annexations must include dedication of all easements for rights-of-way for collector and arterial streets, adjacent local streets, public water, sanitary sewer, or storm or sewer mains, and Class I public trails not within the right of way for arterial or collector streets. Annexations must also include waivers of right to protest the creation of special or improvement districts necessary to provide the essential services for future development of the City. The recommended Terms of Annexation include requirements for provision of right of way for Bridger Drive, an arterial street, and the unnamed street to the north. See Terms of Annexation 5 and 7. Dedicated Streets or public street and utility easements provide locations for municipal water and sewer mains. Waivers of right to protest special improvement districts are included in Term of Annexation 8 for streets affected by the future development of the property. Any additional easements and rights of way will be provided within the property with future development of the property as required by municipal standards. Exact locations will be determined by further technical analysis and site design. Policy 2: Issues pertaining to master planning and zoning must be addressed prior to or in conjunction with the application for annexation. The subject property is planned for Urban Neighborhood. No change to the growth policy is required. The application includes a request for initial zoning of R-2. See the zone map amendment section of this report for analysis of the zone map amendment criteria. Policy 3: The application for annexation must be in conformance with the current Bozeman Growth Policy. If a Growth Policy Amendment is necessary to accommodate anticipated uses, the amendment process must be initiated by the property owner and completed prior to any action for approval of the application for annexation. The property is designated “Urban Neighborhood” on the future land use map. No growth policy amendment is required. See discussion under zone map amendment Criterion A. Policy 4: Initial zoning classification of the property to be annexed will be determined by the City Commission, in compliance with the Bozeman Growth Policy and upon a recommendation of the City Zoning Commission, simultaneously with review of the annexation petition. The property proposed for annexation requests a zoning designation of R-2. See the zone map amendment section of this report for review of the zoning criteria. The Zoning Commission will hold a public hearing on January 23, 2023 and forward a recommendation to the City Commission. 268 Staff Report for the 22247; 1603 Bridger Drive Annexation & ZMA Page 14 of 29 Note: The annexation and the placement of a zoning district designation on the property by the City does not guarantee available services or approval of a specific development. Section 38.300.020.C of the Unified Development Code states: “Placement of any given zoning district on an area depicted on the zoning map indicates a judgment on the part of the city that the range of uses allowed within that district are generally acceptable in that location. It is not a guarantee of approval for any given use prior to the completion of the appropriate review procedure and compliance with all of the applicable requirements and development standards of this chapter and other applicable policies, laws and ordinances. It is also not a guarantee of immediate infrastructure availability or a commitment on the part of the city to bear the cost of extending services.” Policy 5: The applicant must indicate their preferred zoning classification as part of the annexation petition. The applicant has requested R-2, the Residential Moderate Density District. See Section 7 of this report for analysis of the requested zoning. Policy 6: Fees for annexation processing will be established by the City Commission. Applicant has paid required application fees. Policy 7: It is the policy of the City that annexations will not be approved where unpaved county roads will be the most commonly used route to gain access to the property unless the landowner proposes a method to provide for construction of the road to the City’s street standards. Yes. The property proposed for annexation is accessed from Bridger Drive to the south, a principal arterial, which is paved to the edge of the subject property. Policy 8: Prior to annexation of property, the City will require the property owner to acquire adequate and usable water rights, or an appropriate fee in lieu thereof, in accordance with Section 38.410.130 of the municipal code, as amended. Yes. The property owner shall provide usable water rights, or cash in-lieu of water rights thereof, in an amount to be determined by the Director of Public Works, as outlined by Section 38.410.130 of the municipal code. The calculated amount will be determined by the Director of Public Works and based on the zoning designation approved by the City Commission. This will be addressed with the annexation agreement. Policy 9: Infrastructure and emergency services for an area proposed for annexation will be reviewed for the health, safety and welfare of the public and conformance with the City’s adopted facility plans. If the City determines adequate services cannot be provided to ensure public health, safety and welfare, the City may require the property owner to provide a written plan for accommodation of these services, or the City may reject the petition for annexation. Additionally, the parcel to be annexed may only be 269 Staff Report for the 22247; 1603 Bridger Drive Annexation & ZMA Page 15 of 29 provided sanitary sewer service via the applicable drainage basin defined in the City Wastewater Collection Facilities Plan. Yes. City infrastructure and emergency services are available to the subject property. An eight- inch water main is located in the alley north of the property – approximately 250 feet from the existing structure. An eight-inch sewer main is also located in the alley north of the property. The property is located adjacent to residential development that is currently served by Bozeman Fire. Recommended Term of Annexation #9 includes the provision that the applicant will be responsible for installing facilities required to provide full municipal services to the property in accordance with city policy at the time of connection. Policy 10: The City may require annexation of any contiguous property for which city services are requested or for which city services are currently being provided. In addition, any person, firm, or corporation receiving water or sewer service outside of the City limits is required as a condition of initiating or continuing such service, to consent to annexation of the property serviced by the City. The City Manager may enter into an agreement with a property owner for connection to the City’s sanitary sewer or water system in an emergency conditioned upon the submittal by the property owner of a petition for annexation and filing of a notice of consent to annexation with the Gallatin County Clerk and Recorder’s Office. The contract for connection to city sewer and/or water must require the property owner to annex or consent to disconnection of the services. Connection for purposes of obtaining City sewer services in an emergency requires, when feasible as determined by the City, the connection to City water services. The property is not currently provided City services. No emergency connection is requested. City services will be required to be provided concurrent with future development. Terms of Annexation 9 - 12 address connection to services. Policy 11: The annexation application shall be accompanied by mapping to meet the requirements of the Director of Public Works. Where an area to be annexed can be entirely described by reference to a certificate of survey or subdivision plat on file with the Gallatin County Clerk and Recorder the mapping may be waived by the Director of Public Works. Criterion Met. Mapping to meet the requirements of the Director of Public Works must be provided with the Annexation Agreement. Mapping requirements are addressed in Recommended Term of Annexation 2. The map must include adjacent right of way. 270 Staff Report for the 22247; 1603 Bridger Drive Annexation & ZMA Page 16 of 29 Policy 12: The City will assess system development/ impact fees in accordance with Montana law and Chapter 2, Article 6, Division 9, Bozeman Municipal Code. This annexation does not require immediate payment of fees. The annexation agreement will provide notice of obligations to pay impact fees at times as required in ordinance. See Term of Annexation #4. Policy 13: Public notice requirements: Notice for annexation of property must be coordinated with the required notice for the zone map amendment required with all annexation. The zone map amendment notice must contain the materials required by 38.220.410, BMC. Notices of the public hearing have been mailed, published in the Bozeman Daily Chronicle, and posted on the site as set forth under this policy. See Appendix A for more details. Policy 14: Annexation agreements must be executed and returned to the City within 60 days of distribution of the annexation agreement by the City, unless another time is specifically identified by the City Commission. This policy will be implemented only if the Commission acts to grant preliminary approval. If the application is denied then no annexation agreement will be necessary. Policy 15: When possible, the use of Part 46 annexations is preferred. This annexation is being processed under Part 46 provisions. Policy 16: Where a road improvement district has been created, the annexation does not repeal the creation of the district. The City will not assume operations of the district until the entirety of the district has been annexed. Any funds held in trust for the district will be used to benefit the district after transfer to the City. Inclusion within a district does not lessen the obligation to participate in general city programs that address the same subject. No road improvement district is associated with this application. Policy 17: The City will notify the Gallatin County Planning Department and Fire District providing service to the area of applications for annexation. The necessary agencies were notified and provided copies of the propose annexation. Policy 18: The City will require connection to and use of all City services upon development of annexed properties. The City may establish a fixed time frame for connection to municipal utilities. Upon development, unless otherwise approved by the City, septic systems must be properly abandoned and the development connected to the City sanitary sewer system. Upon development, unless otherwise approved by the City, water wells on the subject property may be used for irrigation, but any potable uses must be supplied from the City water distribution system and any wells disconnected 271 Staff Report for the 22247; 1603 Bridger Drive Annexation & ZMA Page 17 of 29 from structures. The property owner must contact the City Water and Sewer Superintendent to verify disconnects of wells and septic systems. There is a residential structures on the property which has on-site well and septic system and will be required to severe thee use of the on-sight systems and connect to City water and sewer service. A term of annexation requires connection to municipal water and sewer implements this policy. In conjunction with future connection the septic system must be properly abandoned and the well disconnected from the domestic supply. Terms of Annexation 8-10 address these issues. SECTION 7 - ZONE MAP AMENDMENT STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS In considering applications for approval under this title, the advisory boards and City Commission must consider the following criteria (letters A-K). As an amendment is a legislative action, the Commission has discretion to determine a policy direction. The burden of proof that the application should be approved lies with the Applicant. See the application materials for the Applicant’s response to the criteria A zone map amendment must be in accordance with the growth policy (criteria A) and be designed to secure safety from fire and other dangers (criteria B), promote public health, public safety, and general welfare (criteria C), and facilitate the provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other public requirements (criteria D). Therefore, to approve a zone map amendment the Commission must find Criteria A-D are met. In addition, the Commission must also consider criteria E-K, and may find the zone map amendment to be positive, neutral, or negative with regards to these criteria. To approve the zone map amendment, the Commission must find the positive outcomes of the amendment outweigh negative outcomes for criteria E-K. In determining whether the criteria are met, Staff considers the entire body of regulations for land development. Standards which prevent or mitigated negative impacts are incorporated throughout the entire municipal code but are principally in Chapter 38, Unified Development Code. Section 76-2-304, MCA (Zoning) Criteria A. Be in accordance with a growth policy. Criterion Met. The BCP 2020, Chapter 5, p. 73, in the section titled Review Criteria for Zoning Amendments and Their Application, discusses how the various criteria in 76-2-304 MCA are applied locally. Application of the criteria varies depending on whether an amendment is for the zoning map or for the text of Chapter 38, BMC. The first criterion for a zoning amendment is accordance with a growth policy. 272 Staff Report for the 22247; 1603 Bridger Drive Annexation & ZMA Page 18 of 29 Future Land Use Map The proposed amendment is a change to the zoning map. Therefore, it is necessary to analyze compliance with the future land use map. Chapter 3 of the BCP 2020 addresses the future land use map. The introduction to that chapter discusses the importance of the chapter. Following are some excerpts. “Future land use is the community’s fundamental building block. It is an illustration of the City’s desired outcome to accommodate the complex and diverse needs of its residents.” “The land use map sets generalized expectations for what goes where in the community. Each category has its own descriptions. Understanding the future land use map is not possible without understanding the category descriptions.” The area of this application is wholly surrounded by urbanized area and is within the anticipated growth area of the City. As shown on the maps in Section 1, on the excerpt of the current future land use map, the property is designated as Urban Neighborhood. The Urban Neighborhood designation description reads: “This category primarily includes urban density homes in a variety of types, shapes, sizes, and intensities. Large areas of any single type of housing are discouraged. In limited instances, an area may develop at a lower gross density due to site constraints and/or natural features such as floodplains or steep slopes. Complementary uses such as parks, home- based occupations, fire stations, churches, schools, and some neighborhood-serving commerce provide activity centers for community gathering and services. The Urban Neighborhood designation indicates that development is expected to occur within municipal boundaries. This may require annexation prior to development. Applying a zoning district to specific parcels sets the required and allowed density. Higher density residential areas are encouraged to be, but are not required or restricted to, proximity to commercial mixed use areas to facilitate the provision of services and employment opportunities without requiring the use of a car.” The correlation between the future land use map of the growth policy and the zoning districts is presented in Table 4 of the Bozeman Community Plan 2020. As shown in the following Correlation with Zoning Table, the R-2 district is an implementing district of the Urban Neighborhood category. 273 Staff Report for the 22247; 1603 Bridger Drive Annexation & ZMA Page 19 of 29 Goals and Policies A zoning amendment is also evaluated against the goals and policies of the BCP 2020. Most of the goals and policies are not applicable to this application. Relevant goals and objectives have been identified by staff. Conflict with the text of the growth policy hasn’t been identified. The Short Term Action list on page 63 of the BCP 2020 describes 14 items to implement the growth policy. The first two relate to direct changes to the zoning map in support of listed goals and objectives. These include increasing the intensity of zoning districts in already developed areas. Beginning on page 71 of the BCP 2020 in the section titled Zoning Amendment Review, the document discusses how the City implements zoning for new areas, 274 Staff Report for the 22247; 1603 Bridger Drive Annexation & ZMA Page 20 of 29 amendments to areas, and revisions to existing text. This section includes a discussion of when the City may initiate a zoning change to a more intensive district to increase development opportunities. This section demonstrates that the City, as a matter of policy, is supportive of more intensive zoning districts and development, even within already developed areas. It is inconsistent with this approach to zone at annexation for lower intensities than what infrastructure and planning documents will support. This policy approach does not specify any individual district but does lean towards the more intensive portion of the zoning district spectrum. Goal DCD-1: Support urban development within the City. The proposed zoning is occurring in conjunction with an annexation. Any future development will be required to occur at urban densities and will be within the City. The property is surrounded by the existing City limits and with access to municipal services will have substantial potential to increase intensity of use of the property. If the City Commission declines the annexation then the requested R-2 zoning will not occur. DCD-1.11 Pursue annexations consistent with the future land use map and adopted facility plans for development at urban intensity. The proposed zoning is consistent with the future land use map and is within the current facilities plans. Although infrastructure is currently installed near the subject property, the property does not have access as it is not yet annexed. This zoning action is a step in correcting this deficiency. Goal RC-3: Collaborate with Gallatin County regarding annexation and development patterns adjacent to the City to provide certainty for landowners and taxpayers. RC-3.3 Prioritize annexations that enable the incremental expansion of the City and its utilities. The zone map amendment is proposed in association with an annexation. The area to be annexed, for all intent and purpose, wholly surrounded by the City one of a number of isolated inholding with the City service area and street network. The County Planning office was notified of the proposed annexation and zoning change. No comments in opposition have been received. RC-3.4 Encourage annexation of land adjacent to the City prior to development and encourage annexation of wholly surrounded areas. The property, for all intent and purpose, is wholly surrounded by the City. The property is seeking annexation and municipal zoning for the purpose of maintaining and possibly expanding the use and intensity of the site. The application is in accordance with the growth policy. 275 Staff Report for the 22247; 1603 Bridger Drive Annexation & ZMA Page 21 of 29 B. Secure safety from fire and other dangers. Criterion Met. The existing building is constructed of unknown quality, fire, and safety measures. Any renovations, expansions, or removal and replacement must meet the development standards of the City and, in some cases, might require retrofitting to ensure the building is safe for occupants and neighboring properties. The 2017 Fire and EMS Master Plan shows this property within the acceptable response reach of the Fire Department. Fire protection water supply will be provided by the City of Bozeman water system. The property is not within any delineated floodplain. Upon annexation the subject property will be provided with City emergency services including police, fire and ambulance. The property is part of the Story Mill Fire District which does not have a fire district itself, but receives fire protection service from the City of Bozeman through a contract that has been in effect since 1979. The initial zoning of R-2 is not likely to adversely impact safety from fire and other dangers. The property will be required to conform to all City of Bozeman public safety, building and land use requirements. The City provides emergency services to adjacent properties and there will be no difficulty extending service to this parcel. C. Promote public health, public safety, and general welfare. Criterion Met. The proposed zoning designation will promote general welfare by implementing the future land use map in the Bozeman Community Plan. Public health and safety will be positively affected as the proposed annexation will allow the existing structure to connect to the City sewer system, thereby removing a septic system and lessening resulting groundwater discharge. As noted in criterion B, further development and redevelopment must be in accordance with modern building, access, stormwater, pedestrian circulation, ingress and egress to the site, and full connection to the greater transportation network for users ensuring the promotion of public health, safety and general welfare. D. Facilitate the provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other public requirements. Criterion Met. The BCP 2020, page 74, says regarding evaluation of Criteria B-D for zoning amendments: “For a map amendment, all three of the above elements are addressed primarily by the City’s long range facility Plans, the City’s capital improvements program, and development standards adopted by the City. The standards set minimum sizing and flow requirements, require dedication of parks, provision of right of way for people and vehicles, keep development out of floodplains, and other items to address public safety, etc. It is often difficult to assess these issues in detail on a specific site. 276 Staff Report for the 22247; 1603 Bridger Drive Annexation & ZMA Page 22 of 29 For example, at the time of annexation, the final intensity of development is unknown and it may be many years before development occurs and the impacts are experienced. The availability of other planning and development review tools must be considered when deciding the degree of assurance needed to apply an initial zoning at annexation.” The City conducts extensive planning for municipal transportation, water, sewer, parks, and other facilities and services provided by the City. The adopted plans allow the City to consider existing conditions and identify enhancements needed to provide additional service needed by new development. The City implements these plans through its capital improvements program that identifies individual projects, project construction scheduling, and financing of construction. Private development must demonstrate compliance with standards. The application site is located within the City’s land use, transportation, parks, and utility planning areas and those plans show this property as developing within the City when further development is proposed. Adequacy of all these public requirements is evaluated during the subdivision and site development process. As stated in 38.300.020.C, the designation of a zoning district does not guarantee approval of new development until the City verifies the availability of needed infrastructure. All zoning districts in Bozeman enable a wide range of uses and intensities. At time of future subdivision or site plan review the need for individual services can be more precisely determined. No subdivision or site plan is approved without demonstration of adequate capacity. 38.300.020.C, “Placement of any given zoning district on an area depicted on the zoning map indicates a judgment on the part of the city that the range of uses allowed within that district are generally acceptable in that location. It is not a guarantee of approval for any given use prior to the completion of the appropriate review procedure and compliance with all of the applicable requirements and development standards of this chapter and other applicable policies, laws and ordinances. It is also not a guarantee of immediate infrastructure availability or a commitment on the part of the city to bear the cost of extending services.” The development of public infrastructure improvements to serve the property will be required to conform to the City of Bozeman’s adopted standards which require properties to construct public infrastructure and/or pay impact fees, assessments, and taxes to support transportation, water, sewer, school, parks, and other public requirements. City water and sewer lines are located adjacent to the property to the north (approximately 250-feet from the existing structures) and the terms of annexation require the applicant to connect to municipal services and install any facilities required to provide full municipal services to the property. The property is accessed from Bridger Drive (principal arterial) and the Bridger Creek trail is located across Bridger Drive. Park dedication is not required as there is an existing residence on the property. Any future development of the property will be evaluated for additional required improvements during the plan review process. 277 Staff Report for the 22247; 1603 Bridger Drive Annexation & ZMA Page 23 of 29 E. Reasonable provision of adequate light and air. Criterion Met. The R-2 zoning designation has requirements for setbacks, height, and lot coverage, which provide for the reasonable provision of adequate light and air. Any future development of the property will be required to conform to City standards for setbacks, height, lot coverage, and buffering. In addition to the zoning standards, adopted building codes contain more detailed requirements for air circulation, window placement, and building separation that further ensure the intent of this criterion is satisfied. F. The effect on motorized and non-motorized transportation systems. Neutral. The proposed R-2 zoning designation will have a neutral effect on the City’s motorized and non-motorized transportation systems as the property is occupied by an existing residence. As a result, the impact to the motorized and non-motorized transportation systems is not anticipated to change. The terms of annexation require dedication of 30 feet of right-of- way along the rear (north) of the property to allow the future connection of a local street. In the event this local street is built, it would have a positive effect on the motorized and non- motorized transportation systems as it would increase street connectivity adjacent to the Legends subdivision and result in the addition of a sidewalk. Further, the small size of the property and the lower-intensity zoning proposed will not create a measurable effect on transportation systems. The recommended terms of annexation and City’s development approval processes, for example, requirements for easements, the waiver of the right to protect special improvement districts related to transportation, and construction of future roads are expected to sufficiently address impacted transportation systems as a result of the map amendment. On page 74-75 of the BCP 2020 in the discussion of application of the zoning criteria it says: “Development creates or funds many of the City’s local streets, intersection upgrades, and trails. Therefore, although a text or map amendment may allow more intense development than before, compliance with the adopted Plans and standards will provide adequate capacity to offset that increase.” The zoning designation itself does not change traffic flow or transportation demand, and the compliance of future development with adopted standards will offset impacts from development. G. Promotion of compatible urban growth. Criterion Met. Individuals may have widely varying opinions about what constitutes compatibility. Compatible development and Compatible land use are defined in Article 38.7 BMC to establish a common reference for consideration of this criterion and application of development standards. They are defined as: 278 Staff Report for the 22247; 1603 Bridger Drive Annexation & ZMA Page 24 of 29 “Compatible development. The use of land and the construction and use of structures which is in harmony with adjoining development, existing neighborhoods, and the goals and objectives of the City's adopted growth policy. Elements of compatible development include, but are not limited to, variety of architectural design; rhythm of architectural elements; scale; intensity; materials; building siting; lot and building size; hours of operation; and integration with existing community systems including water and sewer services, natural elements in the area, motorized and non-motorized transportation, and open spaces and parks. Compatible development does not require uniformity or monotony of architectural or site design, density or use. Compatible land use. A land use which may by virtue of the characteristics of its discernible outward effects exist in harmony with an adjoining land use of differing character. Effects often measured to determine compatibility include, but are not limited to, noise, odor, light and the presence of physical hazards such as combustible or explosive materials.” As noted in the definition of Compatible development, there are many elements that contributed to compatibility. The final sentence of the definition deserves emphasis “Compatible development does not require uniformity or monotony of architectural or site design, density or use.” Compatible development can be different than what is already in place. The City has adopted a variety of standards to implement compatibility. The proposed R-2 district is a predominantly residential district. The allowed uses for residential districts are set in section 38.310.030. The proposed zoning is similar in intensity and character as neighboring properties. There are six zoning districts within a quarter mile radius of the site, including the R-2 district. The proposed amendment is associated with an annexation creating continuity between the existing and surrounding uses. Staff concludes R- 2 zone is compatible and is urban growth as called for in the growth policy. See also discussion for Criteria A & H. H. Character of the district. Criterion Met. The proposed R-2 zoning promotes the character of the district as the intent of the Residential Moderate Density district is to “… provide for one- and two-household residential development at urban densities within the city in areas that present few or no development constraints.” Surrounding properties are low-density single-household residential. Adjacent properties in the City are zoned R-1 to the north and R-S (Residential Suburban) to the south. Adjacent properties in Gallatin County, to the east and west, are zoned Residential Suburban. The proposed R-2 zoning designation is consistent with the character of the neighborhood as well as existing development on the property. Staff concurs with the applicant’s statement that, “The character of the surrounding subdivision is distinct from that of the Mount Baldy subdivision; the Legends subdivision immediately to the north of the subject property, which contains large, single-family homes on small lots. Given the lot space of the subject 279 Staff Report for the 22247; 1603 Bridger Drive Annexation & ZMA Page 25 of 29 property, even with R-2 zoning, it is likely that there would be more open space on our lot or lots than that of many homes in the surrounding neighborhoods. R-2 zoning requires the same height and setback restrictions of R-1 zoning.” Section 76-2-302, MCA says “…legislative body may divide the municipality into districts of the number, shape, and area as are considered best suited to carry out the purposes [promoting health, safety, morals, or the general welfare of the community] of this part.” Emphasis added. This proposal amends the zoning map and not the text. Therefore, no element of this amendment modifies the standards of any zoning district. The character of the districts as created by those standards remains intact. As noted above, the City Commission has latitude in considering the geographical extents of a zoning district. It is not expected that zoning freeze the character of an area in perpetuity. Rather, it provides a structured method to consider changes to the character. The City has defined compatible development as: “The use of land and the construction and use of structures which is in harmony with adjoining development, existing neighborhoods, and the goals and objectives of the City's adopted growth policy. Elements of compatible development include, but are not limited to, variety of architectural design; rhythm of architectural elements; scale; intensity; materials; building siting; lot and building size; hours of operation; and integration with existing community systems including water and sewer services, natural elements in the area, motorized and non-motorized transportation, and open spaces and parks. Compatible development does not require uniformity or monotony of architectural or site design, density or use.” The City has adopted many standards to identify and avoid or mitigate demonstrable negative impacts of development. These will support the ability of future development in this new area of the R-2 district to be compatible with adjacent development and uphold the character of the area. Below is an excerpt from the Residential Density map supported by the City GIS Department. It shows adjacent properties, except for the Headlands subdivision, hosts more density than the subject property. 280 Staff Report for the 22247; 1603 Bridger Drive Annexation & ZMA Page 26 of 29 Living unit density map I. Peculiar suitability for particular uses. Criterion Met. The property is located in an area of primarily single-household residential development which is suitable for uses allowed in the R-2 zoning district. The proposed R-2 zoning designation is suitable for the current use of the property. The applicant adds, “Given the need for diverse housing options, the proposed R-2 zoning will maximize the specific characteristics of the subject property that make it suitable for additional future dwelling units.” J. Conserving the value of buildings. Criterion Met. There is an existing single-household residential structure with an attached garage and detached shed behind the home in an area of compatible residential land uses. The proposed R-2 zoning designation will allow for similar land use patterns and will thus conserve the value of buildings in the area. The applicant has not proposed future alterations or development on the property. Any future development on the property will be subject to standards in the R-2 zoning district which will ensure the conservation of adjacent building values including but not limited to standards set forth in the Unified Development Code for fire safety, setbacks, buffers and building heights, which will help alleviate any potential negative impacts to the values of adjacent buildings as a result of future development on the subject property. Therefore, this criterion is met. 281 Staff Report for the 22247; 1603 Bridger Drive Annexation & ZMA Page 27 of 29 K. Encourage the most appropriate use of land throughout the jurisdictional area. Criterion Met. As discussed in Criteria A above, this property has been planned for residential uses for many years. The proposed R-2 zoning designation will encourage the most appropriate use of land as the property is surrounded by lower density residential development, which is consistent with the R-2 designation. The applicant argues, “The current Growth Policy categorizes the Mount Baldy Subdivision and surrounding areas as urban neighborhood. R-2 zoning will facilitate appropriate use of the land by encouraging a diversity of housing types, increase density, and support infill which are all priorities of the Growth Policy. Furthermore, the proposed R-2 zoning designation is consistent with the Bozeman Community Plan’s future land use map designation of “Urban Neighborhood.” PROTEST NOTICE FOR ZONING AMENDMENTS IN THE CASE OF WRITTEN PROTEST AGAINST SUCH CHANGES SIGNED BY THE OWNERS OF 25% OR MORE OF THE AREA OF THE LOTS WITHIN THE AMENDMENT AREA OR THOSE LOTS OR UNITS WITHIN 150 FEET FROM A LOT INCLUDED IN A PROPOSED CHANGE, THE AMENDMENT SHALL NOT BECOME EFFECTIVE EXCEPT BY THE FAVORABLE VOTE OF TWO-THIRDS OF THE PRESENT AND VOTING MEMBERS OF THE CITY COMMISSION. The City will accept written protests from property owners against the proposal described in this report until the close of the public hearing before the City Commission. Pursuant to 76-2-305, MCA, a protest may only be submitted by the owner(s) of real property within the area affected by the proposal or by owner(s) of real property that lie within 150 feet of an area affected by the proposal. The protest must be in writing and must be signed by all owners of the real property. In addition, a sufficient protest must: (i) contain a description of the action protested sufficient to identify the action against which the protest is lodged; and (ii) contain a statement of the protestor's qualifications (including listing all owners of the property and the physical address), to protest the action against which the protest is lodged, including ownership of property affected by the action. Signers are encouraged to print their names after their signatures. A person may in writing withdraw a previously filed protest at any time prior to final action by the City Commission. Protests must be delivered to the Bozeman City Clerk, 121 North Rouse Avenue, PO Box 1230, Bozeman, MT 59771-1230. APPENDIX A - NOTICING AND PUBLIC COMMENT Notice was published in the Bozeman Daily Chronicle on January 8 and January 15, 2023. The site was posted on site and notices mailed by the applicant as required by 38.220 and the 282 Staff Report for the 22247; 1603 Bridger Drive Annexation & ZMA Page 28 of 29 required confirmation provided to the Planning Office. Notice was or will be provided at least 15 and not more than 45 days prior to any public hearing. As of the writing of this report on February 1, 2023, no written comments have been received on this application. APPENDIX B - PROJECT GROWTH POLICY AND PROPOSED ZONING Adopted Growth Policy Designation: The property is designated as “Urban Neighborhood” in the Bozeman Community Plan 2020. 1. URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD. This category primarily includes urban density homes in a variety of types, shapes, sizes, and intensities. Large areas of any single type of housing are discouraged. In limited instances, an area may develop at a lower gross density due to site constraints and/or natural features such as floodplains or steep slopes. Complementary uses such as parks, home-based occupations, fire stations, churches, schools, and some neighborhood-serving commerce provide activity centers for community gathering and services. The Urban Neighborhood designation indicates that development is expected to occur within municipal boundaries. This may require annexation prior to development. Applying a zoning district to specific parcels sets the required and allowed density. Higher density residential areas are encouraged to be, but are not required or restricted to, proximity to commercial mixed use areas to facilitate the provision of services and employment opportunities without requiring the use of a car. Proposed Zoning Designation and Land Uses: The applicant has requested zoning of R-2, “Residential Moderate Density” in association with the annexation of the property. According to Sec. 38.300.100(C) of the Unified Development Code, “The intent of the R-2 residential moderate density district is to provide for one- and two-household residential development at urban densities within the city in areas that present few or no development constraints.” APPENDIX C - OWNER INFORMATION AND REVIEWING STAFF Owner:Per Hjalmarsson & Sue Hjalmarsson, 1603 Bridger Drive, Bozeman, MT 59715 Applicant: IMEG, 1091 Stoneridge Drive, Bozeman, MT 59718 Representative: Liam Durkin, 1091 Stoneridge Drive, Bozeman, MT 59718 Report By:Tom Rogers, Senior Planner, Community Development Department 283 Staff Report for the 22247; 1603 Bridger Drive Annexation & ZMA Page 29 of 29 FISCAL EFFECTS No unusual fiscal effects have been identified. No presently budgeted funds will be changed by this Annexation or Zone Map Amendment. Future development will incur costs and generate review according to standard City practices. ATTACHMENTS The full application and file of record can be viewed at the Community Development Department at 20 E. Olive Street, Bozeman, MT 59715. https://weblink.bozeman.net/WebLink/Browse.aspx?startid=264155 284 Memorandum REPORT TO:City Commission FROM:Bernie Massey, Assistant Treasurer Laurae Clark, Treasurer Melissa Hodnett, Finance Director SUBJECT:Resolution 5455 Creation of Special Improvement Lighting District 776, Eastlake Professional Center MEETING DATE:February 14, 2023 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Resolution RECOMMENDATION:Adopt Commission Resolution 5455 / Creation of Special Improvement Lighting District 776, Eastlake Professional Center STRATEGIC PLAN:7.5. Funding and Delivery of City Services: Use equitable and sustainable sources of funding for appropriate City services, and deliver them in a lean and efficient manner. BACKGROUND:The Commission did on January 10, 2023 adopt Commission Resolution No. 5454 / Intent to Create Special Improvement Lighting District #776, Eastlake Professional Center as per MCA 7-12-4301. The property owner has been noticed of the public hearing on this date. Creating a lighting district is a requirement of final plat approval. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None ALTERNATIVES:As suggested by the City Commission. FISCAL EFFECTS:As a result of creating this lighting district, the City will pay the associated power bills and schedule system maintenance. We will recover these costs by billing property owners each year on their City Assessment bill. It is estimated to cost $37.97 per acre within the district or $228.00 annually for the entire district, or on an average size lot of 65,384 square feet the annual estimated cost would be $57.01, which is payable semiannually. Attachments: Resolution 5455-Creation of SILD 776 .doc Report compiled on: October 25, 2022 285 Page 1 of 4 RESOLUTION 5455 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, RELATING TO LIGHTING DISTRICT NO. 776 EASTLAKE PROFESSIONAL CENTER CREATING THE DISTRICT FOR THE PURPOSE OF MAINTAINING LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS AND ASSESSING THE COSTS OF MAINTENANCE AND ENERGY THEREFOR TO BENEFITTED PROPERTY BY THE LEVY OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. BE IT RESOLVED by the City Commission (the “Commission”) of the City of Bozeman, Montana (the “City”), as follows: Section 1 Passage of Resolution of Intention. This Commission, on January 10, 2023, adopted Resolution No. 5454 (the “Resolution of Intention”), pursuant to which this Commission declared its intention to create a special lighting district, designated as Special Lighting District No. 776 (EASTLAKE PROFESSIONAL CENTER)of the City (the “District”), under Montana Code Annotated, Title 7, Chapter 12, Part 43, as amended (the “Act”), for the purpose of financing costs of certain local improvements described generally therein (the “Improvements”) and paying costs incidental thereto, including costs associated with the creation and administration of the District. Section 2 Notice and Public Hearing. Notice of passage of the Resolution of Intention was duly published, posted and mailed in all respects in accordance with law, and on February 14, 2023, this Commission 286 Resolution 5455, Creation of SILD 776 Page 2 of 4 conducted a public hearing on the creation of the District and the making of the Improvements. The meeting of this Commission at which this resolution was adopted is the first regular meeting of the Commission following the expiration of the period ended 15 days after the first date of publication of the notice of passage of the Resolution of Intention (the “Protest Period”). Section 3 Protests. Within the Protest Period, no protests were filed with the City Clerk. Section 4 Creation of the District; Insufficiency of Protests. The District is hereby created on the terms and conditions set forth in and otherwise in accordance with, the Resolution of Intention. The findings and determinations made in the Resolution of Intention are hereby ratified and confirmed. Section 5 Preparation and Levying of Assessments. It shall be the duty of the City Clerk to prepare all necessary schedules and resolutions for the levying of assessments in the District necessary to finance the Improvements and present such resolution to this Commission for adoption in conformance with Section 7-12-4328, M.C.A., on or before the first Monday in October. The City Clerk is authorized to provide notice of the resolution of assessment and schedule a public hearing therefore in conformance with Sections 7-12-4329 and 7-12-4330, M.C.A., and upon final passage of such resolution deliver it to the City Treasurer. Section 6 Lighting District Fund Established. There is hereby created a fund to be known as the Special Lighting District No. 776 Fund (the “Fund”). All money derived from the collection of the assessments as provided in Section 5 herein and the Act shall be deposited in the Fund and used to 287 Resolution 5455, Creation of SILD 776 Page 3 of 4 pay costs of the Improvements. PASSED, ADOPTED, AND APPROVED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana, at a regular session thereof held on the 14 th day February, 2023. ___________________________________ CYNTHIA ANDRUS Mayor ATTEST: ________________________________________ MIKE MAAS City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ___________________________________ GREG SULLIVAN City Attorney 288 Resolution 5455, Creation of SILD 776 Page 4 of 4 CERTIFICATE AS TO RESOLUTION AND ADOPTING VOTE I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting recording officer of the City of Bozeman, Montana (the “City”), hereby certify that the attached resolution is a true copy of Resolution No. 5455 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, RELATING TO LIGHTING DISTRICT 776 (EASTLAKE PROFESSIONAL CENTER); CREATING THE DISTRICT FOR THE PURPOSE OF MAINTAINING LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS AND ASSESSING THE COSTS FOR MAINTENANCE AND ENERGY THEREFOR TO BENEFITTED PROPERTY BY THE LEVY OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENT,(the “Resolution”), on file in the original records of the City in my legal custody; that the Resolution was duly adopted by the City Commission of the City at a meeting on February 14, 2023 and that the meeting was duly held by the City Commission and was attended throughout by a quorum, pursuant to call and notice of such meeting given as required by law; and that the Resolution has not as of the date hereof been amended or repealed. I further certify that, upon vote being taken on the Resolution at said meeting, the following Commissioners voted in favor thereof:______________________________________ _______________________________ ; voted against the same: _________________________; abstained from voting thereon: ________________ ; or were absent:__________________. WITNESS my hand officially this 14th day of February, 2023. ___________________________________ MIKE MAAS City Clerk 289 Memorandum REPORT TO:City Commission FROM:Bernie Massey, Assistant Treasurer Laurae Clark, Treasurer Melissa Hodnett, Finance Director SUBJECT:Resolution 5457 Creation of Special Improvement Lighting District 777, Billings Clinic Bozeman Campus MEETING DATE:February 14, 2023 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Resolution RECOMMENDATION:Adopt Commission Resolution 5457 / Creation of Special Improvement Lighting District 777, Billings Clinic Bozeman Campus STRATEGIC PLAN:7.5. Funding and Delivery of City Services: Use equitable and sustainable sources of funding for appropriate City services, and deliver them in a lean and efficient manner. BACKGROUND:The Commission did on January 10, 2023 adopt Commission Resolution 5456 / Intent to Create Special Improvement Lighting District 777, Billings Clinic Bozeman Campus as per MCA 7-12-4301. The property owner has been noticed of the public hearing on this date. Creating a lighting district is a requirement of final plat approval. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None ALTERNATIVES:As suggested by the City Commission FISCAL EFFECTS:As a result of creating this lighting district, the City will pay the associated power bills and schedule system maintenance. We will recover these costs by billing property owners each year on their City Assessment bill. It is estimated to cost $6.43 per acre within the district or $373.08 annually for the entire district, or on an average size lot of 2,527,874 square feet the annual estimated cost would be $373.08, which is payable semiannually Attachments: Resolution 5457-Creation of SILD 777 .doc Report compiled on: October 25, 2022 290 Page 1 of 4 RESOLUTION 5457 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, RELATING TO LIGHTING DISTRICT NO. 777 BILLINGS CLINIC BOZEMAN CAMPUS CREATING THE DISTRICT FOR THE PURPOSE OF MAINTAINING LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS AND ASSESSING THE COSTS OF MAINTENANCE AND ENERGY THEREFOR TO BENEFITTED PROPERTY BY THE LEVY OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. BE IT RESOLVED by the City Commission (the “Commission”) of the City of Bozeman, Montana (the “City”), as follows: Section 1 Passage of Resolution of Intention. This Commission, on January 10, 2023, adopted Resolution No. 5456 (the “Resolution of Intention”), pursuant to which this Commission declared its intention to create a special lighting district, designated as Special Lighting District No. 777 (BILLINGS CLINIC BOZEMAN CAMPUS of the City (the “District”), under Montana Code Annotated, Title 7, Chapter 12, Part 43, as amended (the “Act”), for the purpose of financing costs of certain local improvements described generally therein (the “Improvements”) andpaying costs incidental thereto, including costs associated with the creation and administration of the District. Section 2 Notice and Public Hearing. Notice of passage of the Resolution of Intention was duly published, posted and mailed in all respects in accordance with law, and on February 14, 2023, this Commission 291 Resolution 5457, Creation of SILD 777 Page 2 of 4 conducted a public hearing on the creation of the District and the making of the Improvements. The meeting of this Commission at which this resolution was adopted is the first regular meeting of the Commission following the expiration of the period ended 15 days after the first date of publication of the notice of passage of the Resolution of Intention (the “Protest Period”). Section 3 Protests. Within the Protest Period, no protests were filed with the City Clerk. Section 4 Creation of the District; Insufficiency of Protests. The District is hereby created on the terms and conditions set forth in and otherwise in accordance with, the Resolution of Intention. The findings and determinations made in the Resolution of Intention are hereby ratified and confirmed. Section 5 Preparation and Levying of Assessments. It shall be the duty of the City Clerk to prepare all necessary schedules and resolutions for the levying of assessments in the District necessary to finance the Improvements and present such resolution to this Commission for adoption in conformance with Section 7-12-4328, M.C.A., on or before the first Monday in October. The City Clerk is authorized to provide notice of the resolution of assessment and schedule a public hearing therefore in conformance with Sections 7-12-4329 and 7-12-4330, M.C.A., and upon final passage of such resolution deliver it to the City Treasurer. Section 6 Lighting District Fund Established. There is hereby created a fund to be known as the Special Lighting District No. 777 Fund (the “Fund”). All money derived from the collection of the assessments as provided in Section 5 herein and the Act shall be deposited in the Fund and used to 292 Resolution 5457, Creation of SILD 777 Page 3 of 4 pay costs of the Improvements. PASSED, ADOPTED, AND APPROVED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana, at a regular session thereof held on the 14 th day of February, 2023. ___________________________________ CYNTHIA ANDRUS Mayor ATTEST: ________________________________________ MIKE MAAS City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ___________________________________ GREG SULLIVAN City Attorney 293 Resolution 5457, Creation of SILD 777 Page 4 of 4 CERTIFICATE AS TO RESOLUTION AND ADOPTING VOTE I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting recording officer of the City of Bozeman, Montana (the “City”), hereby certify that the attached resolution is a true copy of Resolution No. 5457 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, RELATING TO LIGHTING DISTRICT 777 (BILLINGS CLINIC BOZEMAN CAMPUS); CREATING THE DISTRICT FOR THE PURPOSE OF MAINTAINING LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS AND ASSESSING THE COSTS FOR MAINTENANCE AND ENERGY THEREFOR TO BENEFITTED PROPERTY BY THE LEVY OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENT,(the “Resolution”), on file in the original records of the City in my legal custody; that the Resolution was duly adopted by the City Commission of the City at a meeting on February 14, 2023 and that the meeting was duly held by the City Commission and was attended throughout by a quorum, pursuant to call and notice of such meeting given as required by law; and that the Resolution has not as of the date hereof been amended or repealed. I further certify that, upon vote being taken on the Resolution at said meeting, the following Commissioners voted in favor thereof:______________________________________ _______________________________ ; voted against the same: _________________________; abstained from voting thereon: ________________ ; or were absent:__________________. WITNESS my hand officially this 14th day of February, 2023. ___________________________________ MIKE MAAS City Clerk 294 Memorandum REPORT TO:City Commission FROM:Melissa Hodnett, Finance Director SUBJECT:Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) for Fiscal Year 2022 and Audit Results MEETING DATE:February 14, 2023 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Finance RECOMMENDATION:I move to approve the Fiscal Year 2022 Annual Comprehensive Financial Report and the accompanying Letter of Governance. STRATEGIC PLAN:7.5. Funding and Delivery of City Services: Use equitable and sustainable sources of funding for appropriate City services, and deliver them in a lean and efficient manner. BACKGROUND:Section 2-7-503 MCA requires that a financial report be prepared for every fiscal year. This statute also requires a biannual audit of this report - including the accounts, financial records, and transactions of all administrative departments of the City - by independent certified public accountants selected by the City Commission. The City Commission and City Administration have historically believed that an annual audit provides a higher level of financial assurance and fiscal integrity than a biannual audit, and this intention is expressed in Section 5.09 of the City Charter. This policy, along with the State legal reporting requirement, has been followed for fiscal year 2022, and the clean unmodified opinion expressed by the audit firm of Anderson ZurMuehlen & Co., P.C. has been included in the accompanying Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR). The ACFR of the CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA for the fiscal year ended JUNE 30, 2022 is hereby submitted to the Commission. Responsibility for both the accuracy of the data, and the completeness and fairness of the presentation, including all disclosures, rests with the City. To the best of our knowledge and belief, the enclosed data are accurate in all material respects and are reported in a manner designed to present fairly the financial position and results of operations of the various funds of the City. All disclosures necessary to enable the reader to gain an understanding of the City's financial activities have been included. In addition to the financial audit, the City undertakes a single audit in conformance with the Single Audit Act Amendments of 1996 and the U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Uniform Administrative 295 Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Audits. The results of the single audit, including a schedule of expenditures of federal awards, and the independent auditor's reports on the City's internal controls and compliance with legal requirements, are available in the City's single audit report. The ACFR is presented in three sections: The Introduction Section includes the letter of transmittal, the City's organization chart, and certificates of achievement. The Financial Section includes the report of the independent auditors, Management's Discussion and Analysis (MD&A), the basic financial statements, including the government wide financial statements comprised of the Statement of Net Position and the Statement of Activities, and the accompanying note disclosures to the financial statements. The Financial Section also includes the fund financial statements including the governmental funds financial statements, the proprietary funds financial statements, the fiduciary funds financial statements, and the combining individual funds financial statements for the nonmajor governmental and proprietary funds and the internal service funds. The Statistical Section includes selected financial and demographic information, on a multi-year basis. The transmittal letter read along with the MD&A provides an overview of the financial statements and the financial performance of the City for fiscal year 2022. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None ALTERNATIVES:None FISCAL EFFECTS:A clean unmodified audit opinion on the City's financial statements is viewed favorably by investment analysts and strengthens the City's ability to issue bonds or other debt at a lower interest cost. Attachments: FY22 City of Bozeman ACFR.pdf FY22 Audit Governance Letter.pdf Report compiled on: January 31, 2023 296 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA ANNUAL COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL REPORT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2022 Prepared by the City of Bozeman Finance Department 297 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA ANNUAL COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL REPORT JUNE 30, 2022 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTORY SECTION Letter of Transmittal .................................................................................................................................................................................1-8 Governmental Financial Officers’ Association Certificate of Achievement ................................................................................................... 9 Organizational Chart ................................................................................................................................................................................. 10 City Elected Officials and Officers ........................................................................................................................................................ 11-12 II. FINANCIAL SECTION INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT ............................................................................................................................................... 13-16 A. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS .............................................................................................................................. 17-29 B. BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Government Wide Financial Statements Statement of Net Position .............................................................................................................................................................. 30-31 Statement of Activities ........................................................................................................................................................................ 32 Fund Financial Statements Governmental Fund Financial Statements Balance Sheet – Governmental Funds ..................................................................................................................................... 33-34 Reconciliation of the Balance Sheet of Governmental Funds to the Statement of Net Position ..................................................... 35 Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances – Governmental Funds .................................................. 36 Reconciliation of the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances of Governmental Funds to The Statement of Activities ........................................................................................................................................................... 37 Proprietary Fund Financial Statements Statement of Net Position – Proprietary Funds ........................................................................................................................ 38-39 Statement of Revenues, Expenses, and Changes in Fund Net Position – Proprietary Funds ....................................................... 40 Statement of Cash Flows – Proprietary Funds ......................................................................................................................... 41-42 Fiduciary Fund Financial Statements Statement of Fiduciary Net Position – Fiduciary Funds ................................................................................................................. 43 Statement of Changes in Fiduciary Net Position – Fiduciary Funds .............................................................................................. 44 Notes to Financial Statements ........................................................................................................................................................... 45-118 298 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA ANNUAL COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL REPORT JUNE 30, 2022 TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED) C. REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION OTHER THAN MANAGEMENT DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS Schedule of Changes in Total OPEB Liability & Related Ratios .............................................................................................................. 119 Schedule of Proportionate Share of Net Pension Liability and Schedule of Contributions ................................................................ 120-122 Notes to Required Supplementary Information – Pension Plan Changes ........................................................................................ 123-128 Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances – Budget to Actual – General Fund .......................................... 129 Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances – Budget to Actual American Rescue Plan Special Revenue Fund ................................................................................................................................. 130 Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances – Budget to Actual Street Impact Fee Special Revenue Fund ........................................................................................................................................ 131 Notes to Required Supplementary Information – Budgetary Information ................................................................................................. 132 D. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION Combining and Individual Fund Financial Statements and Schedules– Governmental Funds Combining Balance Sheet – Nonmajor Governmental Funds .................................................................................................... 133-139 Combining Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance – Nonmajor Governmental Funds ................ 140-146 Schedules of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget to Actual Other Major Governmental Funds ........................................................................................................................................ 147-148 Schedules of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget to Actual Nonmajor Governmental Funds ........................................................................................................................................... 149-163 Combining Nonmajor Proprietary Fund Statements Combining Statements of Net Position ....................................................................................................................................... 164-165 Combining Statements of Revenues, Expenses, and Changes in Net Position ................................................................................. 166 Combining Statements of Cash Flows ....................................................................................................................................... 167-168 Internal Service Funds Statements Combining Statement of Net Position ............................................................................................................................................... 169 Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenses, and Changes in Fund Net Position ......................................................................... 170 Combining Statements of Cash Flows ....................................................................................................................................... 171-172 Fiduciary Funds Combining Statements of Fiduciary Net Position – Custodial Funds ................................................................................................. 173 Combining Statement of Changes in Fiduciary Net Position – Custodial Funds ................................................................................ 174 299 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA ANNUAL COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL REPORT JUNE 30, 2022 TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED) III. STATISTICAL SECTION Financial Trends Section Net Position by Component .............................................................................................................................................................. 175 Changes in Net Position ............................................................................................................................................................ 176-177 Fund Balances of Governmental Funds ............................................................................................................................................ 178 Changes in Fund Balances, Governmental Funds ............................................................................................................................ 179 Revenue Capacity Section Assessed value of Taxable Property ................................................................................................................................................. 180 City Taxable Market and Taxable Values .......................................................................................................................................... 181 Tax Increment District Taxable Valuation Detail ................................................................................................................................ 182 Downtown Bozeman Improvement District & Comparison to City Taxable Value .............................................................................. 183 Property Tax Levies for Tax Increment/Urban Renewal Districts ...................................................................................................... 184 Direct and Overlapping Property Tax Rates ...................................................................................................................................... 185 Principal Property Tax Payers........................................................................................................................................................... 186 Principal Property Tax Payers in Downtown Bozeman Improvement District .................................................................................... 187 Principal Property Tax Payers in Bozeman Midtown Urban Renewal District .................................................................................... 188 Top Ten Largest Tax Payers in Bozeman Midtown Urban Renewal District ...................................................................................... 189 Property Tax Levies and Collections ................................................................................................................................................. 190 Water Sold by Type of Customer ...................................................................................................................................................... 191 Water and Sewer Rates .................................................................................................................................................................... 192 Debt Capacity Section Ratios of Outstanding Debt by Type ................................................................................................................................................. 193 Ratios of General Bonded Debt Outstanding .................................................................................................................................... 194 Direct and Overlapping Governmental Activities Debt ....................................................................................................................... 195 Legal Debt Margin Information .......................................................................................................................................................... 196 Pledged Revenue Coverage ............................................................................................................................................................. 197 Debt Service Requirements and Coverage for Downtown Tax Increment District ............................................................................. 198 Summary of Outstanding SIDs.......................................................................................................................................................... 199 Revolving Fund Balance and Bond Secured Thereby ....................................................................................................................... 200 Special Improvement District Assessment Billing and Collections ..................................................................................................... 201 Demographics and Economic Section Demographic and Economic Statistics .............................................................................................................................................. 202 Principal Employers for Gallatin County ............................................................................................................................................ 203 300 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA ANNUAL COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL REPORT JUNE 30, 2022 TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED) STATISTICAL SECTION (CONTINUED) Operating Information Full-time Equivalent City Government Employees by Function/Program ........................................................................................... 204 Operating Indicators by Function/Program ........................................................................................................................................ 205 Capital Asset Statistics by Function/Program .................................................................................................................................... 206 IV. SINGLE AUDIT SECTION Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards ......................................................................................................................................... 207 Notes to Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards ............................................................................................................................ 208 Independent Auditor’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting and on Compliance and Other Matters Based On an Audit of Finance Statements Performed in Accordance with Government Auditing Standards.................................. 209-210 Independent Auditor’s Report on Compliance for Each Major Program and on Internal Control Over Compliance Required by the Uniform Guidance ............................................................................................................................. 211-213 Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs and Status of Prior Audit Findings .............................................................................. 214-215 301 PART I INTRODUCTORY SECTION 302 1 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA December 19, 2022 To the Honorable Mayor, City Commission and Citizens of the City of Bozeman, Montana: The Annual Comprehensive Financial Report of the CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2022 is hereby submitted. The financial statement and supporting schedules have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (GAAP) and meet the requirements of the standards as prescribed by the Secretary of State Audits Division. We believe the enclosed data, as presented, is accurate in all material respects and are reported in a manner designed to present fairly the financial position and results of operations of the various funds of the City. All disclosures necessary to enable the reader to gain an understanding of the City's financial activities have been included. Management assumes full responsibility for the completeness and reliability of the information contained in this report, based upon a comprehensive framework of internal control that it has established for this purpose. Because the cost of internal control should not exceed anticipated benefits, the objective is to provide reasonable, rather than absolute, assurance that the financial statements are free of any material misstatements. Anderson ZurMuehlen & Co., P.C., Certified Public Accountants, have issued an unmodified or “clean” opinion on the City’s financial statements for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2022. The independent auditors report is located at the front of the Financial Section of this report. 303 2 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA Management’s discussion and analysis (MD&A) immediately follows the independent auditor’s report and provides a narrative introduction, overview, and analysis of the basic financial statements. The MD&A complements this letter of transmittal and should be read in conjunction with it. In addition to the financial audit, the City undertakes a single audit in conformance with the Single Audit Act Amendments of 1996 and U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Audits. The results of this single audit, including a schedule of expenditures of federal awards, and the independent auditor’s reports on the City’s internal controls and compliance with legal requirements, with special emphasis on internal controls and legal requirements involving the administration of federal awards, are available in the City’s issued single audit report. CITY OF BOZEMAN PROFILE The City of Bozeman sits in the center of Gallatin County, flanked by the Bridger Mountains and Custer Gallatin National Forest, just south of the Missouri River Headwaters. This diverse Rocky Mountain landscape creates easy access to year-round outdoor activities for Bozeman residents including hiking, mountain biking, climbing, camping, fishing, and downhill and cross-country skiing. The City encompasses an area of approximately 20 square miles with its next-closest municipality being the City of Belgrade, approximately seven miles from the City’s outermost boundary. Bozeman is the county seat of Gallatin County and is the home to Montana State University – Bozeman, and the Fighting Bobcats. Bozeman is located 143 miles west of Billings and 200 miles east of Missoula. The City was incorporated in April of 1883 with a city council form of government, and later in January 1922 transitioned to its current city manager/city commission form of government. The population of Bozeman in the 2020 census is 53,293 – which is a total increase of 43% from April 2010 – which continues Bozeman’s standing as the fourth largest city in the state. 304 3 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA The government provides a full range of services. These services include police and fire protection; sanitation services; water, waste water & storm water utilities; the construction and maintenance of streets and infrastructure; recreational activities; cultural events; planning and zoning; and general administrative services. The City, as a primary government, is supported or works closely with certain entities to provide these services to the citizens of the City of Bozeman. The Bozeman Public Library Board of Trustees and the Parking Commission are excluded from presentation in these financial statements since their relationship with the City is strictly advisory in nature at this time. BUDGET DEVELOPMENT PROCESS The City of Bozeman budget serves several purposes. For the citizens of the City of Bozeman, it presents a picture of the city government operations and intentions for the year. For the City Commission, it serves as a policy tool and as an expression of goals and objectives. For City Management, it is used as an operating guide and a control mechanism. The City Manager’s Recommended Budget is created and submitted to the City Commission annually. Public work sessions are then held by the Commissioners at which time the City Manager, Finance Director, and department staff explain the budget recommendations and underlying justification for the requests. During (or following) the work sessions, the Commissioners may adjust the proposed budget. Following any adjustments to the City Manager's budget recommendation, a tentative appropriation ordinance is prepared and a public hearing is held. The Commission may make additional adjustments following the public hearing, after which time, the Commission passes the appropriation ordinance in final form. The legal level of budgetary control is established at the fund level. ECONOMIC CONDITION AND OUTLOOK With a diverse economy, an educated labor force, and a high quality of life, Bozeman continues to be one of the most desirable and fastest growing small cities in the United States. Bozeman has a 2021 population of approximately 53,000 residents. Between 2010 and 2020, the City added nearly 17,000 residents, which translates to a growth rate of nearly 1,700 new residents per year or an annual growth rate of 3.9 percent. There were 116 new single-family home applications and 62 multi-family residential building applications received in Bozeman in fiscal year 2022. This continued growth has increased the need for City services and infrastructure. 305 4 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA The City of Bozeman has a diverse economy driven by key segments that distinguish it from other similarly sized cities. While retail trade and hotels and restaurant are large sectors, Bozeman and Gallatin County also have significant numbers of jobs in health care, manufacturing, professional and technical services, finance and insurance, and business services (admin./waste mgt. services). About half of the jobs in the County are within the City of Bozeman. Between 2015 and 2020, Gallatin County added 7,012 private wage and salary jobs (2.8 percent per year), with Bozeman capturing approximately 40 percent of the growth. Employment growth was driven by Construction, Professional and Technical Services, and Health Care. The regional workforce is highly skilled and well educated. Approximately 59.8 percent of Bozeman’s workforce has a bachelor’s degree or higher. The presence of MSU and the high concentration of professional and high skill jobs—such as technology, photonics, quantum computing and health care—are drivers of the highly educated local workforce. Places with a high quality of life are also able to attract skilled labor. The uncertainty in the economy initially caused by the COVID-19 pandemic continues through fiscal year 2022 and beyond, with the inflation rate continuing to climb beyond the highest levels since the early 1980s. Consumer Price Index (CPI) has grown over the last 10 years for the United States and particularly for the Western States. As of September 2022, the CPI-U Western Region is up 8.3% from a year ago. This inflation increases the price on every service and commodity purchased by the City with the “rippling” impact of these commodities across all sectors. Worker shortages, another lingering impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, also had a significant impact on fiscal year 2022 financial statements, resulting in vacancy savings versus the adopted budget. Significant progress has been made over the last few months filling vacancies and we anticipate this impact to be minimal in fiscal year 2023. The City has continued to take advantage of the federal $1.9 trillion COVID-19 relief package - the American Rescue Plan. The package included $350 billion in aid for state and local governments, along with additional funding for other areas like education, rental assistance and transit. The President signed the bill into law on March 11, 2021. The City received over $6 million at the end of fiscal year 2022. 306 5 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA FINANCIAL POLICIES The overall goal of the City's financial policies is to establish and maintain effective management of the city's financial resources. Formal policy statements and major objectives provide the foundation for achieving this goal. The City avoids budgetary practices that balance current expenditures at the expense of meeting future years' expenses and seeks to maintain a diversified and stable revenue base that is estimated in a realistic and conservative manner. For one-time revenues, highest priority is given to the funding of capital assets or other non-recurring expenditures. On-going expenditures are limited to levels which can be supported by current revenues. Construction projects and capital purchases of $25,000 or more are included in the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), with all capital purchases of $5,000 or more reported as capital outlays in the financial statements. Minor capital outlays of less than $5,000 are included in the regular operating budget. Long-term debt is limited to capital improvements which cannot be financed from current revenues and repays borrowed funds within a period that does not exceed the expected useful life of the project. The City does not use long-term debt for financing current operations and adheres to a policy of full public disclosure with regard to the issuance of debt. A minimum level of general fund reserve equal to 2 months of annual revenues, or 16.67%, is maintained. This reserve is committed to be used for: cash flow purposes, accrued employee payroll benefits which are not shown as a liability, unanticipated equipment acquisition and replacement, and to enable the city to meet unexpected expenditure demands or revenue shortfalls. The City manages and accounts for its financial activity in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), as set forth by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB). The city maintains its accounting records for general governmental operations on a modified accrual basis, with revenues recorded when available and measurable, and expenditures recorded when services or goods are received and liabilities incurred. Accounting records for proprietary fund types and similar trust funds are maintained on an accrual basis, with all revenues recorded when earned and expenses recorded at the time liabilities are incurred, without regard to receipt or payment of cash. 307 6 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA HIGHLIGHTS OF FISCAL YEAR 2022 Continued construction of the new Bozeman Public Safety Center: Ground breaking for the Bozeman Public Safety Center (BPSC) was early April, 2020 with an opening date of September 2022. On the November 11th, 2018 ballot, the citizens of Bozeman voted to issue $36,965,000 in General Obligation bonds to fund the building of the Bozeman Public Safety Center which houses the Police, City Attorneys, Municipal Court, one Fire Station and public use spaces. The bonds were successfully sold in September of 2019 and will be repaid using the City’s taxing authority. Total project cost is $43.5M about $37M of that is building construction. BPSC is three stories and 95,000 square feet. Two unique features of the building include the largest solar array in Montana, and onsite stormwater treatment. FOR THE FUTURE Strategic Plan With the adoption of the Strategic plan, the fiscal year 2023 budget incorporated efforts to implement each of the vision statements. The Commission set thirteen priorities along with strides towards the strategic plan. The highlights of the impact on the budget include: 1. An Engaged Community. Fostering successful collaboration with other public agencies and building on our successes, which is being achieved through City-County Regional Planning and other areas such as the CATS (EPIC-N) program with MSU. We are continuing our work to foster a culture of civic engagement by using our adopted communication plan for the organization to expand Community Outreach and community engagement. 2. An Innovative Economy. This plan supports retention and growth of both the traded and local business sectors in coordination with the Economic Development Plan that is budgeted to be updated. Working with our urban renewal districts, we are strategically investing in infrastructure as a mechanism to encourage economic development. We are reviewing policies, Pursuing State and Federal Grants and Philanthropic Funding and will aid the Commission in developing steps towards its priority of Property Tax Relief. 3. A Safe, Welcoming Community. This budget includes steps toward an Inclusive City with training and the implementation of our Belonging in Bozeman Team. The Bozeman Public Safety Center opened in FY23, consolidating municipal court and police and fire administration in one location. Body worn cameras, as planned in the recent capital plan, will be integrated with the new technology being implemented at the Bozeman Public Safety Center. Identifying Options to Ban Flavored Tobacco is being explored. 308 7 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA 4. A Well‐Planned City. The Parks, Recreation, Open Space, and Trails (PROST) Master Plan implementation began in FY22 and will continue in FY23. Community Housing will continue the implementation of its action plan, which will provide more Affordable Housing including a commitment of 8.0 mills in the FY23 budget. We have Planning & Land Use Initiatives with the City County Regional Planning, and Code Updates. The FY23 Budget also includes the implementation of our Annexation Analysis & Study. 5. A Creative, Learning Culture. The Percent for Art program has been incorporated into our Capital Improvement Plan and some projects are already underway. This program provides a guaranteed funding mechanism for the acquisition of artwork for new public facilities and civic spaces. 6. A Sustainable Environment. The FY23 Budget looks at Climate Action Plan Implementation and continues to increase the Sustainability Division’s budget from $255,909 in FY20 to over $680,000 in FY23. 7. A High-Performance Organization. We have completed the Advisory Board Consolidation. Throughout the organization, departments are working on collaborating and functioning as a high-performing and innovative team. Staff continues to look at rates and fees to ensure we are using equitable and sustainable sources of funding for appropriate City services with an emphasis on delivering them in a lean and efficient manner. OTHER INFORMATION Independent Audit The State of Montana requires a biannual audit of the books of accounts, financial records, and transactions of all administrative departments of the City by independent certified accountants selected by the City Commission. It is the belief of the City Commission and Executive staff that an annual audit assures a higher level of financial management and fiscal responsibility. This policy, along with the legal requirements, has been complied with and the auditors' opinion of Anderson, ZurMuehlen & Co. P.C., has been included in this report. 309 8 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA Awards The Government Finance Officers' Association (GFOA) awarded a Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting to the City of Bozeman for its comprehensive annual financial report for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2021. The Certificate of Achievement is a prestigious national award that is an important recognition of conformance with the highest standards for preparation of state and local government financial reports. This was the 38th consecutive year that the City has received this prestigious award. In order to be awarded a Certificate of Achievement, the City published an easily readable and efficiently organized annual comprehensive financial report that conforms to program standards and satisfies generally accepted accounting principles and applicable legal requirements. The City believes our current annual comprehensive financial report continues to meet the Certificate of Achievement Program's requirement and we are submitting it to the GFOA to determine its eligibility for another certificate. The City has also received the Distinguished Budget Presentation Award from the GFOA for thirty years. The award represents the City's commitment to meeting the highest principles of governmental budgeting. The budget is rated in four major categories: as a policy document, an operations guide, a financial plan and a communications device. Budget documents must be rated "proficient" in all four categories to receive the award. Acknowledgements The preparation of the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report on a timely basis was made possible by the dedicated service of the entire staff of the Finance Department. Each member of the department has our sincere appreciation for the contributions made in the preparation of this report, with special thanks to Aaron Funk for his dedication and expertise in financial reporting. We would also like to express appreciation to the City Commission for their interest and support in planning and overseeing the operations of the City in a responsible and professional manner. Sincerely, Jeff Mihelich City Manager Melissa Hodnett Director of Finance 310 9 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS’ ASSOCIATION CERTIFICATE 311 10 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA ORGANIZATIONAL CHART Fiscal Year 2022 312 11 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA CITY ELECTED OFFICIALS AND OFFICERS Fiscal Year 2022 ELECTED OFFICIALS Legislative Cynthia Andrus Mayor Terence Cunningham Deputy Mayor Christopher Coburn Commissioner I-Ho Pomeroy Commissioner Jennifer Madgic Commissioner Judicial Karl Seel J. Colleen Herrington Municipal Judge Municipal Judge OFFICERS Executive Jeff Mihelich Chuck Winn Vacant Michael Maas City Manager Assistant City Manager Assistant City Manager City Clerk Department of Law Gregory Sullivan City Attorney Department of Finance Melissa Hodnett, MBA Finance Director Aaron Funk, CPA Controller Laurae Clark Treasurer 313 12 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA CITY ELECTED OFFICIALS AND OFFICERS Fiscal Year 2022 OFFICERS (CONTINUED) Department of Economic Development Brit Fontenot Department of Information Technology Scott McMahan Department of Human Resources Cassandra Tozer Department of Public Safety Director of Economic Development Information Technology Director Human Resources Director James Veltkamp Chief of Police Josh Waldo Fire Chief Department of Public Service Nicholas Ross Director of Public Service John Alston City Engineer Jon Henderson Director of Strategic Services Department of Public Welfare Mitch Overton Director of Parks & Recreation Susan Gregory Director of Bozeman Public Library Department of Planning and Community Development Anna Bentley Director of Planning and Community Development 314 PART II FINANCIAL SECTION 315 13 INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT Honorable Mayor, City Commissioners, and City Manager of the City of Bozeman, Montana Report on the Audit of the Financial Statements Opinions We have audited the accompanying financial statements of the governmental activities, the business-type activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of City of Bozeman, Montana (the City), as of and for the year ended June 30, 2022, and the related notes to the financial statements, which collectively comprise the City’s basic financial statements as listed in the table of contents. In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the respective financial position of the governmental activities, the business-type activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of City of Bozeman, Montana, as of June 30, 2022, and the respective changes in financial position, and, where applicable, cash flows, thereof for the year then ended in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. Basis for Opinions We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits conformed in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Our responsibilities under those standards are further described in the Auditor’s Responsibilities for the Audit of the Financial Statements section of our report. We are required to be independent of the City of Bozeman, and to meet our other ethical responsibilities, in accordance with the relevant ethical requirements relating to our audit. We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our audit opinions. Change in Accounting Principle As described in Note 1 to the financial statements, in 2022, the City adopted new accounting guidance, Government Accounting Standards Board Statement No. 87, Leases. Our opinions are not modified with respect to this matter. 316 14 Responsibilities of Management for the Financial Statements Management is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of these financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America; and for the design, implementation, and maintenance of internal control relevant to the preparation and fair presentation of financial statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error. In preparing the financial statements, management is required to evaluate whether there are conditions or events, considered in the aggregate, that raise substantial doubt about the City’s ability to continue as a going concern for twelve months beyond the financial statement date, including any currently known information that may raise substantial doubt shortly thereafter. Auditor’s Responsibilities for the Audit of the Financial Statements Our objectives are to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements as a whole are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error, and to issue an auditor’s report that includes our opinions. Reasonable assurance is a high level of assurance but is not absolute assurance and therefore is not a guarantee that an audit conducted in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards and Government Auditing Standards will always detect a material misstatement when it exists. The risk of not detecting a material misstatement resulting from fraud is higher than for one resulting from error, as fraud may involve collusion, forgery, intentional omissions, misrepresentations, or the override of internal control. Misstatements are considered material if there is a substantial likelihood that, individually or in the aggregate, they would influence the judgment made by a reasonable user based on the financial statements. In performing an audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards and Government Auditing Standards, we: • Exercise professional judgment and maintain professional skepticism throughout the audit. • Identify and assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to fraud or error, and design and perform audit procedures responsive to those risks. Such procedures include examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. • Obtain an understanding of internal control relevant to the audit in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the City’s internal control. Accordingly, no such opinion is expressed. • Evaluate the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of significant accounting estimates made by management, as well as evaluate the overall presentation of the financial statements. • Conclude whether, in our judgment, there are conditions or events, considered in the aggregate, that raise substantial doubt about the City’s ability to continue as a going concern for a reasonable period of time. We are required to communicate with those charged with governance regarding, among other matters, the planned scope and timing of the audit, significant audit findings, and certain internal control-related matters that we identified during the audit. 317 15 Required Supplementary Information Accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America require that the management’s discussion and analysis and budgetary comparison information - General Fund and Major Special Revenue Funds, Schedule of Changes in Total Other Postemployment Benefits Liability and Related Ratios, and Schedule of Proportionate Share of Net Pension Liability and Schedule of Contributions be presented to supplement the basic financial statements. Such information is the responsibility of management and, although not a part of the basic financial statements, is required by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board who considers it to be an essential part of financial reporting for placing the basic financial statements in an appropriate operational, economic, or historical context. We have applied certain limited procedures to the required supplementary information in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America, which consisted of inquiries of management about the methods of preparing the information and comparing the information for consistency with management’s responses to our inquiries, the basic financial statements, and other knowledge we obtained during our audit of the basic financial statements. We do not express an opinion or provide any assurance on the information because the limited procedures do not provide us with sufficient evidence to express an opinion or provide any assurance. Supplementary Information Our audit was conducted for the purpose of forming opinions on the financial statements that collectively comprise the City’s basic financial statements. The accompanying combining and individual nonmajor fund financial statements and schedule of expenditures of federal awards, as required by Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards are presented for purposes of additional analysis and are not a required part of the basic financial statements. Such information is the responsibility of management and was derived from and relates directly to the underlying accounting and other records used to prepare the basic financial statements. The information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements and certain additional procedures, including comparing and reconciling such information directly to the underlying accounting and other records used to prepare the basic financial statements or to the basic financial statements themselves, and other additional procedures in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America. In our opinion, the combining and individual nonmajor fund financial statements and the schedule of expenditures of federal awards are fairly stated, in all material respects, in relation to the basic financial statements as a whole. Other Information Management is responsible for the other information included in the report. The other information comprises the introductory and statistical sections but does not include the basic financial statements and our auditor’s report thereon. Our opinions on the basic financial statements do not cover the other information, and we do not express an opinion or any form of assurance thereon. In connection with our audit of the basic financial statements, our responsibility is to read the other information and consider whether a material inconsistency exists between the other information and the basic financial statements, or the other information otherwise appears to be materially misstated. If, based on the work performed, we conclude that an uncorrected material misstatement of the other information exists, we are required to describe it in our report 318 16 Other Reporting Required by Government Auditing Standards In accordance with Government Auditing Standards, we have also issued our report dated December 19, 2022, on our consideration of the City’s internal control over financial reporting and on our tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements and other matters. The purpose of that report is solely to describe the scope of our testing of internal control over financial reporting and compliance and the results of that testing, and not to provide an opinion on the effectiveness of the City’s internal control over financial reporting or on compliance. That report is an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards in considering the City’s internal control over financial reporting and compliance. Bozeman, Montana December 19, 2022 319 A. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS 320 17 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS JUNE 30, 2022 Management of the City of Bozeman (the City) offers readers of the basic financial statements this narrative overview and analysis of the financial activities of the City for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2022. Readers are encouraged to consider the information presented here in conjunction with additional information that is furnished in the letter of transmittal. The focus of the information herein is on the primary government. Overview of the Financial Statements This discussion and analysis is intended as an introduction to the City’s basic financial statements. The basic financial statements comprise three components: 1) government-wide financial statements, 2) fund financial statements, and 3) notes to the basic financial statements. In addition to the basic financial statements, also provided are required and other supplementary information. Government-Wide Financial Statements The Statement of Net Position presents information on all of the City’s assets, liabilities, and deferred inflows/outflows of resources, with the difference reported as net position. Over time, increases or decreases in net position may serve as a useful indicator of whether the financial position of the City is improving or deteriorating. The Statement of Activities reports how the City’s net position changed during the most recent year. All changes in net position are reported as soon as the underlying event giving rise to the change occurs, regardless of the timing of related cash flows. Thus, revenues and expenses are reported in this statement for some items that will only result in cash flows in future fiscal periods (e.g., uncollected taxes and earned but unused vacation and sick leave). The governmental activities reflect the City’s basic services, including police, fire, public works, parks, and general administration. Property taxes, charges for services, state shared revenues, court fines, and recreation fees finance most of these activities. The business-type activities reflect private sector-type operations, such as water, waste water, storm water, solid waste, and parking, where fees for services typically cover all or most of the cost of operations, including depreciation. The government-wide financial statements include not only the City itself (referred to as the primary government), but also other legally separate entities for which the City is financially accountable. Financial information for most of these component units are reported separately from the financial information presented for the primary government itself. A few component units, although legally separate, function essentially as an agency of the City and, therefore, are included as an integral part of the City. Fund Financial Statements A fund is a grouping of related accounts used to maintain control over resources that have been segregated for specific activities or objectives. The City uses fund accounting to ensure and demonstrate compliance with finance-related legal requirements. All of the funds of the City can be divided into categories: governmental funds, proprietary funds, and fiduciary funds that use different accounting approaches. 321 18 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (CONTINUED) JUNE 30, 2022 Governmental funds are used for the City’s basic services and are reported in governmental funds, which focus on how money flows into and out of those funds and the balances left at year-end that are available for spending. These funds are reported using an accounting method called modified accrual accounting, which measures cash and all other financial assets that can readily be converted to cash. The governmental fund statements provide a detailed short-term view of the City’s general government operations and the basic services it provides. Governmental fund information helps you determine whether there are more or fewer financial resources that can be spent in the near future to finance the City’s programs. Because this information does not encompass the long-term focus of the government-wide statements, additional information is provided that reconciles the governmental fund financial statements to the government-wide statements explaining the relationship (or differences) between them. The City maintains individual governmental funds. Information is presented separately in the governmental funds balance sheet and in the governmental funds statement of revenues, expenditures, and changes in fund balances for the General Fund and major special revenue funds. Data from the other governmental funds are combined into a single aggregated presentation. Individual fund data for these non-major governmental funds is provided in the form of combining statements elsewhere in this report. The City adopts an annual appropriated budget for the General Fund. A budgetary comparison schedule has been provided to demonstrate compliance with these budgets for the General Fund in accordance with U.S. GAAP. The City maintains two different types of proprietary funds: enterprise funds and internal service funds. Enterprise funds are used to report the same functions presented as business-type activities in the government-wide financial statements. The City uses enterprise funds to account for water, wastewater, stormwater, solid waste and parking services. When the City charges customers for the services it provides, whether to outside customers or to other units of the City, these services are generally reported in proprietary funds. Proprietary funds are reported in the same way that all activities are reported in the Statement of Net Position and the Statement of Activities. In fact, the City’s enterprise funds (a component of the proprietary funds) are the same as the business-type activities we report in the government-wide statements but provide more detail and additional information, such as cash flows, for proprietary funds. We use internal service funds to report activities that provide supplies and services for the City’s other programs and activities, such as the Vehicle Maintenance Fund and Health Insurance Fund. Internal service fund activity is reported as governmental activity in the government-wide statements since this activity, the financing of goods and services for other funds of the government, is more governmental than business-type in nature. The City uses fiduciary funds to account for assets held on behalf of outside parties, including other governments. When these assets are held under the terms of a formal trust agreement, a private-purpose trust fund is used. The City is the trustee, or fiduciary, for other funds, including the Municipal Court Fund, the Montana Arts Council Fund (Montana Ballet, Bozeman Symphony Orchestra, and Big Sky Association for the Arts), and the CMC Bozeman Asbestos Site Remediation Fund. It is also responsible for other assets that, because of a trust arrangement, can be used only for the trust beneficiaries. The guidelines for the administration of these funds are contained in applicable financial agreements and/or City ordinances. These documents contain the rules governing the receipt, expenditure, and management of the City’s fiduciary funds. As the statements reflect, the financial activity during the year for these funds is nominal. We exclude these activities from the City’s other financial statements because the City cannot use these assets to finance its operations. The City is responsible for ensuring that the assets reported in these funds are used for their intended purposes. . 322 19 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (CONTINUED) JUNE 30, 2022 Government-Wide Financial Analysis Net position may serve over time as a useful indicator of a government’s financial position. In the case of the City, assets and deferred outflows exceeded liabilities and deferred inflows by $587.6 million at the close of the most recent fiscal year. Net position increased by $43.8 million this year as compared to a $30.5 million increase last year. The increase in net position was primarily due to an increase in revenue. This fiscal year total revenues increased by $19.4 million or 16% compared to the prior year. The increase in total revenue was mainly due to an increase in restricted capital grants and contributions of $15.3 million. Capital grants and contributions increased largely from additional infrastructure contributed due to the City’s continued growth. Total expenses increased by $6.7 million or 7% compared to the prior year. The increase in expenses was mainly due to increases in public service and public welfare expenses as well as increases in business-type expenses. These increases are attributable to the increasing population and costs associated with serving more people. Net position of the City includes $84.7 million (14%) of restricted net position. These are resources subject to external restrictions as to how they may be used by the City. Table 1 reflects the City’s net position as of June 30, 2022 and 2021: 2022 2021 2022 2021 2022 2021 Current and Other Assets 103,200,397$ 101,328,809$ 57,951,745$ 49,651,049$ 161,152,142$ 150,979,858$ Capital Assets 275,835,087 240,462,418 329,667,072 316,314,532 605,502,159 556,776,950 Total Assets 379,035,484$ 341,791,227$ 387,618,817$ 365,965,581$ 766,654,301$ 707,756,808$ Deferred Outlflows of Resources 7,792,013$ 9,149,572$ 1,245,353$ 1,587,035$ 9,037,366$ 10,736,607$ Long-term Debt Outstanding (95,447,522)$ (99,017,332)$ (53,831,562)$ (54,074,964)$ (149,279,084)$ (153,092,296)$ Other Liabilities (26,155,271) (16,176,604) (2,527,916) (3,170,054) (28,683,187) (19,346,658) Total Liabilities (121,602,793)$ (115,193,936)$ (56,359,478)$ (57,245,018)$ (177,962,271)$ (172,438,954)$ Deferred Inflows of Resources (8,369,794)$ (1,740,945)$ (1,794,124)$ (503,558)$ (10,163,918)$ (2,244,503)$ Net Position: Net investment in capital assets 217,241,690$ 196,931,242$ 286,461,913$ 271,812,360$ 503,703,603$ 468,743,602$ Restricted for parking capital projects - - 130,316 130,316 130,316 130,316 Restricted for infrastructure capital projects - - 516,859 516,199 516,859 516,199 Restricted for general government 1,774,351 2,389,783 - - 1,774,351 2,389,783 Restricted for Public Safety 19,316,942 14,048,758 - - 19,316,942 14,048,758 Restricted for Public Service 7,398,134 6,134,953 - - 7,398,134 6,134,953 Restricted for Public Welfare 13,582,824 12,457,409 - - 13,582,824 12,457,409 Restricted for capital projects 3,214,239 23,048,892 25,416,609 10,705,061 28,630,848 33,753,953 Restricted for debt service 10,035,011 10,378,317 3,274,157 3,125,439 13,309,168 13,503,756 Unrestricted (15,708,281) (31,383,436) 14,910,714 23,514,665 (797,567) (7,868,771) Total Net Position 256,854,910$ 234,005,918$ 330,710,568$ 309,804,040$ 587,565,478$ 543,809,958$ Activities Activities Primary Government Governmental Business-type Total 323 20 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (CONTINUED) JUNE 30, 2022 Table 2 reflects the City’s changes in net position for the years ended June 30, 2022 and 2021. 2022 2021 2022 2021 2022 2021 Revenues Program revenues: Charges for Services 35,800,641$ 32,771,415$ 36,283,040$ 33,157,599$ 72,083,681$ 65,929,014$ Restricted Operating Grants & Contributions 7,707,580 12,156,812 1,511,436 243,536 9,219,016 12,400,348 Restricted Capital Grants & Contributions 12,153,695 4,518,830 13,064,462 5,427,166 25,218,157 9,945,996 General Revenues Property Taxes 29,432,001 27,115,391 - - 29,432,001 27,115,391 Unrestricted Operating Grants & Contributions 5,099,529 4,956,187 - - 5,099,529 4,956,187 Other General Revenues (1,180,572) (1,274,251) (1,070,774) 290,413 (2,251,346) (983,838) Total Revenues 89,012,874 80,244,384 49,788,164 39,118,714 138,801,038 119,363,098 Program Expenses General Government 12,352,494 11,517,404 - - 12,352,494 11,517,404 Public Safety 22,442,450 22,698,030 - - 22,442,450 22,698,030 Public Service 12,176,141 11,018,661 - - 12,176,141 11,018,661 Public Welfare 16,211,729 13,429,890 - - 16,211,729 13,429,890 Interest and Fiscal Fees 2,051,119 2,105,985 - - 2,051,119 2,105,985 Water - - 11,604,238 10,687,976 11,604,238 10,687,976 Waste Water - - 10,849,992 10,209,279 10,849,992 10,209,279 Non-major activities - - 7,824,382 7,186,719 7,824,382 7,186,719 Total Expenses 65,233,933 60,769,970 30,278,612 28,083,974 95,512,545 88,853,944 Excess (deficiency) before special items and transfers 23,778,941 19,474,414 19,509,552 11,034,740 43,288,493 30,509,154 Transfers (1,396,976) (534,921) 1,396,976 534,921 - - Increase (decrease) in net position 22,381,965 18,939,493 20,906,528 11,569,661 43,288,493 30,509,154 Net position - beginning 234,005,918 215,066,425 309,804,040 298,234,379 543,809,958 513,300,804 Restatement of net position due to correction of an error 467,027 - - - 467,027 - Net position - beginning after restatement 234,472,945 215,066,425 309,804,040 298,234,379 544,276,985 513,300,804 Net position - ending 256,854,910$ 234,005,918$ 330,710,568$ 309,804,040$ 587,565,478$ 543,809,958$ Activities Activities Primary Government Governmental Business-type Total 324 21 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (CONTINUED) JUNE 30, 2022 Key elements of the City’s overall Net Position increase are as follows: • The net position of the City’s governmental activities increased by $22.9 million or 10% from $234.0 million last year to $256.9 million this year due to revenues exceeding expenses, the details of which are discussed below. • The net position of the City’s business-type activities increased by $20.9 million, or 7%, from $309.8 million last year to $330.7 million. Overall, the revenues provided by charges for services continued to exceed total expenses, the details of which are discussed further below. Business-type net position cannot be used to make up for deficits reported by governmental activities in the event any such deficits were reported. The City generally can only use the net position of business-type activities to finance the continuing operations of the water, waste water, solid waste, storm water, and parking operations. Governmental activities revenues for the year increased $8.8 million or 11%, from $80.2 million in fiscal year 2021(FY21) to $89.0 million in fiscal year 2022 (FY22), while total expenses increased by $4.4 million or 7%, from $60.8 million in FY21 to $65.2 million in FY22. Property Tax revenues increased by $2.3 million or 9% from $27.1 million to $29.4 million. The number of total property tax mills levied decreased by 15.36 mills from 169.48 to 154.12. However, the mill value increased by 19.9%, from $129,537 in FY21 to $155,353 in FY22. This increase is attributed to new construction and market value appreciation of property within the city. Based on these factors, the FY22 tax levy was 35.54 mills, or approximately $5.5 million, below the statutory maximum allowable tax levy. Charges for Services, which primarily includes Street Assessments, Fire and Street Impact Fees, and the Park and Trails assessments, increased $3.0 million or 9% from $32.8 million in FY21 to $35.8 million in FY22. Street Maintenance District assessment revenue increased by approximately $617,000 or 9%, from $7.0 million in FY21 to $7.6 million in FY22 due to a combination of a rate increase of 6% approved by the City Commission and developments of new lots in the district. Street Impact Fees increased approximately $2 million or 31%. The increase was due to a standard rate increase of 7% as well as an increase in City developments in FY22 compared to FY21. Parks and Trails assessments increased by approximately $1.3 million or 36%, from $3.7 million in FY21 to $5.0 million in FY22 due to a rate increase of 33% approved by the City Commission and development of new assessed lots in the district. Restricted Capital Grants and Contributions (developer-provided infrastructure reported under Program Revenues) increased by $7.7 million or 169% from $4.5 million in FY21 to $12.2 million in FY22. Infrastructure contributions will vary year to year depending on the amount of development as well as what stage in the process the development is in. In FY22 various developments were completed around the City. 40% 9%13% 33% 6%-1% Revenues by Source -Governmental Activities Charges for Services Restricted OperatingGrants & Contributions Restricted Capital Grants& Contributions Property Taxes 325 22 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (CONTINUED) JUNE 30, 2022 Program Expenses increased by $4.4 million or 7%, from $60.8 million in FY21 to $65.2 million in FY22 with Public Service, and Public Welfare being the primary drivers of the increase. Public Service increased by $1.2 million or 11% from $11.0 million in FY21 to 12.2 million in FY22. The increase was primarily due to an increase in personnel services costs as well as additional street maintenance costs and capital equipment purchases. Public Welfare expenses increased by $2.8 million or 21%, from $13.4 million in FY21 to $16.2 million in FY22 due to increases in Parks and Trails District and the North 7th Corridor Tax Increment Finance (TIF) District. The Parks and Trails District expenses increased by approximately $1.2 million compared to the prior year primarily due to increased maintenance contracts as well as administrative overhead, which was not allocated to the District in FY21. The North 7th Corridor TIF District expenses increased by $2.1 million or 590% from $348,563 in FY21 to approximately $2.4 million in FY22. The increase was due to reimbursements of eligible costs from development agreements approved by the City Commission. The City’s six largest programs—Police, Fire, Public Service, Library, Parks and Recreation—as well as each program’s net cost (total cost less revenues generated by the activities). The net cost shows the financial burden that was placed on the City’s taxpayers by each of these functions. Business-type activities total revenues (see Table 2) increased by $10.7 million or 27% from $39.1 million in FY21 to $49.8 million in FY22, while expenses increased by $2.2 million or 8%, from $28.1 million in FY21 to $30.3 million in FY22. The increase was primarily due to an increase in Restricted Capital Grants and Contributions as well as an increase in charges for services. 5,841,950 7,066,592 33,359,948 9,393,42612,352,494 22,442,450 12,176,141 16,211,729 $- $5,000,000 $10,000,000 $15,000,000 $20,000,000 $25,000,000 $30,000,000 $35,000,000 $40,000,000 General government Public safety Public service Public welfare Expenses and Program Revenues -Governmental Activities Program Revenues Expenses 326 23 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (CONTINUED) JUNE 30, 2022 Restricted Capital Grants and Contributions (developer-provided infrastructure reported under Program Revenues) increased by $7.7 million or 141% from $5.4 million in FY21 to $13.1 million in FY22. Restricted capital grants & contributions consist primarily of privately constructed water, wastewater, and storm water infrastructure that was contributed to the city by developers. Infrastructure contributions will vary year to year depending on the amount of development as well as what stage in the process the development is in. In the current year the city saw an increase in the number of developments that were substantially completed by fiscal year-end. Water - Water charges for services revenue increased by $1.4 million or 10%, from $14.0 million in FY21 to $15.4 million in FY22. The City’s water charges for services revenue has steadily increased over the past decade as a result of both an increase in the customer base and due to regular rate increases. Water rates for residential customers did not change in the current year, however minimum charge rates as well as select usage rates for certain non-residential customer types increased between 2% and 20% during the current fiscal year. Wastewater- Wastewater charges for services revenue increased by $1.0 million or 9%, from $11.7 million in FY21 to $12.7 million in FY22. During the current fiscal year wastewater service charge rates were unchanged, however volume rates were increased between 2% and 8% for non-residential customer types. Stormwater- Charges for services revenues increased approximately $154,000 or 10%, from $1.52 million in FY21 to $1.67 million in FY22 due an increase in Stormwater rates of 9%. 73%3% 26% -2% Revenues by Source -Business-Type Activities Charges for Services Restricted OperatingGrants & Contributions Restricted Capital Grants & Contributions Other GeneralRevenues 327 24 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (CONTINUED) JUNE 30, 2022 Operating Expenses increased by $2.2 million or 8%, from $28.1 million in FY21 to $30.3 million in FY22. Water and wastewater saw increases of approximately $900,000 or 9%, and $640,000 or 6%, respectively, while solid waste, parking, and stormwater combined increased by approximately $640,000 or 9%. The increase in water expenses was primarily due to depreciation as well as other expenses, which include contracted services, and travel and training expenses. Water Fund net capital assets increased by approximately $7.2 million which resulted in an increase in depreciation expense. The increase in other expenses was mainly due to temporary staffing needs as well as engineering and other services provided for capital-related projects. The increase in wastewater expenses was primarily due to depreciation expenses and administrative charges, which includes administrative overhead, vehicle maintenance, and other general charges. Wastewater Fund net capital assets increased by approximately $5.7 million which resulted in an increase in depreciation expense. Administrative charges are determined during the budget process and reflect charges for work performed in other divisions. The increase in non-major proprietary funds (solid waste, parking, and stormwater) was primarily due to salaries and benefits and administrative charges. The increase in salaries and benefits was due to filling various positions that were vacant in the prior year from Covid related circumstances. 22,786,635 18,865,540 5,458,392 1,067,793 2,680,578 11,604,238 10,849,992 5,220,011 1,360,611 1,243,760 $- $5,000,000 $10,000,000 $15,000,000 $20,000,000 $25,000,000 Water Waste water Solid waste Parking Stormwater Expenses and Program Revenues-Business-Type Activities Program Revenues Expenses 328 25 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (CONTINUED) JUNE 30, 2022 Financial Analysis of the Government’s Funds As noted earlier, the City uses fund accounting to ensure and demonstrate compliance with financial related legal requirements. Governmental Funds The focus of the City’s governmental funds is to provide information on current year revenues, expenditures, and balances of spendable resources. Such information is useful in assessing the City’s near-term financing requirements. In particular, unassigned fund balance may serve as a useful measure of a government’s net resources available for spending at the end of the fiscal year. As of June 30, 2022, the City’s governmental funds reported combined ending fund balances of $69.1 million, a decrease of $8.2 million in comparison to the prior year. General fund - The General Fund is the main operating fund of the City. The City’s total general fund balance decreased by $581,646 or 6%, from $9,183,265 in FY21 to $8,601,619 in FY22. At the end of the current fiscal year the unassigned fund balance was ($107,076) and the assigned fund balance was $8,708,695. Assigned fund balance includes capital projects that were budgeted for in FY22 but will not be completed until FY23, a 16.67 minimum reserve level required by City Charter, and well as the balance estimated to cover FY23 budget deficit. The negative unassigned fund balance will be recovered through operational savings in FY23. The following factors represent the reasons behind significant changes in the General Fund and significant budgetary variances. Property tax revenues increased in the General Fund by $2.2 million or 14%, from 15,775,452 in FY21 to $18,023,178 in FY22. Actual property tax revenue slightly exceeded budget by just over $100,000. The number of total property tax mills levied decreased by 15.36 mills from 169.48 to 154.12. However, the mill value increased by 19.9%, from $129,537 in FY21 to $155,353 in FY22. When combined, these changes resulted in the increase in total property tax revenues. The other notable changes in revenues and budget variances were the decrease in the fair market value of investments, and transfers from other funds. The change in the fair market value of investments was included in the budget with interest on investments. For several fiscal years prior to FY22 interest rate changes were minimal and therefore the change in the fair market value of investments was insignificant. Due to the significant rate increases that occurred during the year the decrease in the fair market value of investments as of fiscal year end was considerably more than expected in the budget. Transfers from other funds increased from $2.7 million in FY21 to $5.0 million in FY22. Budgeted transfers for FY22 originally included transfers from the health insurance internal service fund for insurance costs and from the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) fund for various planned projects. During the year the budget was revised to account for a $3.1 million transfer from the Revolving Loan fund as directed by resolution and the actual transfer was the reason for the year over year increase in transfers from other funds. The $1.9 million revised budget to actual variance was due to a decrease in the actual amount transferred from the ARPA fund as some of the projects that were scheduled during budget did not occur. Total general fund expenditures increased by approximately $32,000, from $35,325,722 in FY21 to $35,357,729 in FY22. 329 26 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (CONTINUED) JUNE 30, 2022 Significant variances (variances over 10%) between the original budgets compared to the final budgets were as follows: • The Other expenditures final budget, which primarily includes non-departmental grants and other City-wide projects/assistance, exceeded the original budget by $567,000 due to projects that were budgeted for in FY21 but not completed by fiscal year-end. Remaining expenditures were added to the FY22 budget. • Capital outlay expenditures final budget exceeded the original budget by $642,955 due to projects that were budgeted for in FY21 but not completed by fiscal year-end. Remaining expenditures were added to the FY22 budget. • Transfers to other funds final budget exceeded the original budget by $3,186,973. During the year the budget was revised to account for a $3.1 million transfer to the SID Debt Service Fund as directed by resolution. Significant expenditures variances (variances over 10%) between the final budget compared to actual results were as follows: • Public Welfare (cemetery, parks, tree maintenance, library, recreation and community services) actual expenditures were under budget by $1.2 million which was the result of savings in payroll and benefit expenses due to various position vacancies across Public Welfare departments. • Capital outlay was under budget by $1.4 million due to delays in completing capital projects. • Transfers to other funds was under budget by $622,245 due to the actual amount transferred to the SID Debt Service Fund was less than the budgeted amount. A portion of the total provided to the SID Debt Service Fund was considered a due from other funds and will be paid back to the General Fund as the related debt is reduced. American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) Special Revenue Fund This special revenue fund accounts for the ARPA federal grant program. The City received the final installment of the ARPA funding in the current year and per the grantor expenditure guidelines the funding was used primarily for revenue recovery in various general fund departments and water related infrastructure projects. Actual expenditures were under budgeted expenditures due to delays in the infrastructure projects. Fund balance decreased by $197,922 during the current fiscal year due to negative revenue related to the fair market value of investments as of fiscal year end. Street Impact Fee Special Revenue Fund This fund accounts for the collection and expenditures associated with the street impact fee. Fund balance increased by $5.2 million or 65% due to an increase in impact fee revenue as the City continued to see an increase in developments. SID Debt Service Accounts for the accumulation of resources and payment of special assessment bond principal and interest related to general improvement, sidewalk, and curb construction projects. Special assessment revenues, which make up the majority of revenues in the fund, decreased by $73,904 or 8% from $975,387 to $901,483. Expenditures decreased by $43,322 or 12%, from $362,427 to $319,135. As no new SIDs were funded in FY22 the decreases are due to principal payments being reduced as debt is paid off. Fund balance increased by $2.6 million due to a transfer in from the SID revolving fund as approved by resolution. Construction Capital Projects Fund Accounts for the construction of general improvement projects financed by special assessments other than those financed by proprietary funds. Fund balance decreased by $14.8 million, from $24,078,408 to $9,328,155. The decrease was due to capital outlay expenditures of $21,700,471 primarily for the construction of the Bozeman Public Safety Center. The increase in expenditures was offset by the issuance of $7,245,591 in new debt to fund the construction of fire station 2. 330 27 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (CONTINUED) JUNE 30, 2022 Proprietary Funds The City’s proprietary funds provide the same measurement focus found in the government-wide financial statements, but in more detail. Total net position of the Water Fund was $176.3 million, and Wastewater was $137.5 million. Net position for all enterprise funds was $330.7 million. Other significant factors concerning the finances of the enterprise funds can be found in the discussion of the City’s business-type activities in the Government-Wide analysis section earlier in this MD&A. Capital Assets and Bonded Debt Administration Capital Assets At the end of FY22 the City had $605.5 million invested in a broad range of capital assets, including police and fire equipment, buildings, park facilities, roads, and water and sewer lines. This amount represents a net increase (including additions and deductions) of roughly $49 million, or 9% over last year. Refer to capital assets disclosure Note 6 for more information. Major additions and capital projects during the year include: $20.5 million for the construction of the Bozeman Public Safety Center; $1.8 million for the construction of the Sourdough Transmission Main Phase 2; and $2.2 million for the construction of the WRF solids handling project. Table 3 2022 2021 2022 2021 2022 2021 Land 37.4$ 33.6$ 2.2$ 2.2$ 39.6$ 35.8$ Water Rights - - 2.8 2.1 2.8 2.1 CIP 46.8 30.3 24.0 19.2 70.8 49.5 Buildings 35.6 35.5 113.9 113.9 149.5 149.4 Other Structures and Improvements 1.1 1.1 30.6 30.5 31.7 31.6 Machinery & Equipment 19.8 18.1 13.4 12.7 33.2 30.8 Property under Lease 1.0 0.6 - - 1.0 0.6 Vehicle 4.9 4.8 2.3 2.2 7.2 7.0 Infrastructure 264.1 243.5 365.6 350.7 629.7 594.2 Subtotal 410.7 367.5 554.8 533.5 965.5 901.0 Accumulated Depreciation (134.9) (127.1) (225.1) (217.2) (360.0) (344.3) Total Capital Assets 275.8$ 240.4$ 329.7$ 316.3$ 605.5$ 556.7$ Activities Activities Totals Table 3- Capital Assets at Year-End (in millions) Governmental Business-type 331 28 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (CONTINUED) JUNE 30, 2022 Debt At fiscal year-end, the City had $111.5 million in long-term debt outstanding compared to $105.0 million last year (excluding compensated absences) – an increase of $6.5 million, or 6%. Of this amount $48.0 million comprises general obligation debt backed by the full faith and credit of the city. Additional information on the City’s long-term debt for can be found in Note 8 in the notes to the basic financial statements. Table 4 2022 2021 2022 2021 2022 2021 General obligation bonds (backed by the City)48.0$ 43.2$ -$ -$ 48.0$ 43.2$ Tax Increment Financing District (TIFD) bonds 10.3 10.8 - - 10.3 10.8 Special Improvement District Debt 3.8 3.9 - - 3.8 3.9 Notes Payable 2.3 2.2 - - 2.3 2.2 Lease Payable 0.6 0.3 - - 0.6 0.3 Water Revenue Bonds (backed by specific fee revenues)- - 17.3 18.5 17.3 18.5 Wastewater Revenue Bonds (backed by specific fee revenues)- - 27.9 24.6 27.9 24.6 Stormwater Revenue Bonds (backed by specific fee revenues)- - 1.3 1.4 1.3 1.4 Stormwater Lease Payable (backed by specific fee revenues)- - - 0.1 - 0.1 Totals 65.0$ 60.4$ 46.5$ 44.6$ 111.5$ 105.0$ Table 4- Outstanding Debt, at Year-end (in millions) Governmental Business-type Activities Activities Totals The City’s general obligation bonds have been assigned ratings of “Aa3” (TOP, Series 2013 and Series 2014), and “Aa1” (BPSC, Series 2019 and FS2, Series 2022) by Moody’s Investor Services (Moody’s). The City’s tax increment financing bonds have been assigned ratings of “BBB” (Downtown, Series 2020), and “AA” (Midtown, Series 2020) by Standard & Poor’s Rating Services (S&P). Pursuant to State law and except for special provisions concerning general obligation indebtedness incurred for purposes of providing sewer and water service, aggregate outstanding and unpaid general obligation indebtedness for cities cannot exceed 2.5% of the total assessed value of taxable property as ascertained by the last assessment for State and county taxes. The 2021/22 total assessed valuation for the City was $10,724,564,866. The total amount of debt the City may incur according to State law is $268,114,121. As of June 30, 2022, the city had general obligation debt outstanding in the amount of $47,990,000. The City has $220,124,121 of general obligation debt capacity remaining. 332 29 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (CONTINUED) JUNE 30, 2022 Requests for Information This financial report is designed to provide our citizens, taxpayers, customers, and investors and creditors with a general overview of the City’s finances and to show the City’s accountability for the money it receives. Questions concerning the information provided in this report or requests for additional financial information should be addressed to: Finance Department 121 North Rouse Avenue, Bozeman, Montana 59715 This report is available online at https://www.bozeman.net/government/finance 333 B. BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 334 GOVERNMENT-WIDE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 335 30 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA STATEMENT OF NET POSITION June 30, 2022 The Notes to Financial Statements are an integral part of this statement. Governmental Business-type Activities Activities Total ASSETS Cash and investments 65,402,938$ 29,686,747$ 95,089,685$ Restricted cash and investments 27,325,307 24,855,134 52,180,441 Accrued interest 94,798 65,403 160,201 Receivables, net 9,253,638 3,344,461 12,598,099 Notes receivable 403,555 - 403,555 Prepaid expenses 720,161 - 720,161 103,200,397 57,951,745 161,152,142 Capital assets: Non-depreciable land, water rights and CIP 84,197,656 29,033,857 113,231,513 Other capital assets, net of depreciation and amortization 191,637,431 300,633,215 492,270,646 Total capital assets 275,835,087 329,667,072 605,502,159 Total assets 379,035,484 387,618,817 766,654,301 Deferred outflows of resources: Other post-employment benefits 1,102,476 247,861 1,350,337 Pension plan contributions 6,689,537 997,492 7,687,029 Total deferred outflows of resources 7,792,013 1,245,353 9,037,366 Total assets and deferred outflows of resources 386,827,497$ 388,864,170$ 775,691,667$ (continued) 336 31 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA STATEMENT OF NET POSITION (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 The Notes to Financial Statements are an integral part of this statement. Governmental Business-type Activities Activities Total LIABILITIES Accounts payable and accrued expenses 12,935,089$ 2,527,916$ 15,463,005$ Unearned revenue 13,220,182 - 13,220,182 Current portion of long-term liabilities: Compensated absences payable 2,169,321 455,117 2,624,438 Lease obligations 246,930 - 246,930 Closure and post-closure care costs - 310,773 310,773 Bonds and notes 3,332,296 3,395,321 6,727,617 Long-term liabilities, due in more than one year: Compensated absences payable 1,056,455 99,498 1,155,953 Lease obligations 383,984 - 383,984 Closure and post-closure care costs - 864,259 864,259 Pollution remediation obligations - 782,927 782,927 Other post-employment health benefits - implicit rate subsidy 4,196,277 870,839 5,067,116 Bonds and notes 65,518,037 43,084,000 108,602,037 Net pension liability 18,544,222 3,968,828 22,513,050 Total liabilities 121,602,793 56,359,478 177,962,271 DEFERRED INFLOWS OF RESOURCES Other post-employment health benefits - implicit rate subsidy 500,883 97,008 597,891 Pension deferrals 7,868,911 1,697,116 9,566,027 Total deferred inflows of resources 8,369,794 1,794,124 10,163,918 NET POSITION Net investment in capital assets 217,241,690 286,461,913 503,703,603 Restricted: Restricted for parking capital projects - 130,316 130,316 Restricted for infrastructure capital projects - 516,859 516,859 Restricted for general government 1,774,351 - 1,774,351 Restricted for public safety 19,316,942 - 19,316,942 Restricted for public service 7,398,134 - 7,398,134 Restricted for public welfare Expendable 11,898,720 - 11,898,720 Nonexpendable 1,684,104 - 1,684,104 Restricted for capital projects 3,214,239 25,416,609 28,630,848 Restricted for debt service 10,035,011 3,274,157 13,309,168 Unrestricted (15,708,281) 14,910,714 (797,567) Total net position 256,854,910$ 330,710,568$ 587,565,478$ 337 32 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA STATEMENT OF ACTIVITIES Year Ended June 30, 2022 The Notes to Financial Statements are an integral part of this statement. Net (Expense) Revenue and Changes in Net Position Operating Capital Charges for Grants and Grants and Governmental Business-type Functions/Programs Expenses Services Contributions Contributions Activities Activities Total Primary Government Governmental activities: General government 12,352,494$ 5,472,678$ 369,272$ -$ (6,510,544)$ (6,510,544)$ Public safety 22,442,450 4,317,541 2,749,051 - (15,375,858) (15,375,858) Public service 12,176,141 19,176,512 2,029,741 12,153,695 21,183,807 21,183,807 Public welfare 16,211,729 6,833,910 2,559,516 - (6,818,303) (6,818,303) Interest and fiscal fees 2,051,119 - - - (2,051,119) (2,051,119) Total governmental activities 65,233,933 35,800,641 7,707,580 12,153,695 (9,572,017) (9,572,017) Business-type activities: Water 11,604,238 15,431,185 1,167,859 6,187,591 11,182,397$ 11,182,397 Waste water 10,849,991 12,684,974 301,258 5,879,308 8,015,549 8,015,549 Solid waste 5,220,011 5,431,005 27,387 - 238,381 238,381 Parking 1,360,611 1,062,010 5,783 - (292,818) (292,818) Stormwater 1,243,760 1,673,866 9,149 997,563 1,436,818 1,436,818 Total business-type activities 30,278,611 36,283,040 1,511,436 13,064,462 20,580,327 20,580,327 Total primary government 95,512,544$ 72,083,681$ 9,219,016$ 25,218,157$ (9,572,017) 20,580,327 11,008,310 General revenues Property taxes 29,432,001 - 29,432,001 Unrestricted grants and contributions 5,099,529 - 5,099,529 Investment earnings 652,534 321,644 974,178 Increase (decrease) in fair market value of investments (2,337,888) (1,613,219) (3,951,107) Miscellaneous 520,517 219,769 740,286 Gain (loss) on sale of assets (15,735) 1,031 (14,704) Transfers (1,396,976) 1,396,976 - Total general revenues and transfers 31,953,982 326,201 32,280,183 Change in net position 22,381,965 20,906,528 43,288,493 Net position, beginning of the year 234,005,918 309,804,040 543,809,958 Restatement of net position due to correction of an error 467,027 - 467,027 Net position, beginning of the year as restated 234,472,945 309,804,040 544,276,985 Net position, end of the year 256,854,910$ 330,710,568$ 587,565,478$ Primary Government Program Revenues 338 FUND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 339 GOVERNMENTAL FUND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 340 MAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS General Fund – This fund accounts for the financial operations of the City, which are not accounted for in any other Fund. Principal sources of revenue are property taxes, state and local shared revenues, licenses and permits, and charges for services provided to other Funds. Principal expenditures in the general fund are made for police and fire protection, public works, and general government. American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) Special Revenue Fund – This fund accounts for the ARPA federal grant program. Grant funds must be used for the stated purpose of the grant and must meet grantor expenditure guidelines. Street Impact Fees Special Revenue Fund – Accounts for the collection and expenditures associated with the street impact fees. Special Improvement District (SID) Debt Service – Accounts for the accumulation of resources and payment of special assessment bond principal and interest related to general improvement, sidewalk, and curb construction projects. Construction Capital Projects Fund – Accounts for the construction of general improvement projects financed by special assessments other than those financed by proprietary funds. 341 33 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA BALANCE SHEET GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS June 30, 2022 The Notes to Financial Statements are an integral part of this statement. American Other Total General Rescue Plan Street Impact SID Construction Governmental Governmental Fund Act Fee Fund Debt Service Capital Projects Funds Funds ASSETS Cash and investments 7,015,939$ 10,835,105$ -$ 3,004,481$ 11,437,407$ 30,099,335$ 62,392,267$ Receivables: Property taxes 1,692,785 - - - - 1,035,203 2,727,988 Accrued interest 11,741 8,368 17,702 3,193 9,694 44,100 94,798 Customers, net 1,504,486 - - - - 657,828 2,162,314 Special assessments - - - 4,128,644 - 209,585 4,338,229 Other governments - - - - - 1,246 1,246 Due from other city funds 2,212,310 - - - - - 2,212,310 Advances to other city funds - - - - - 693,010 693,010 Prepaid expenditures 17,751 - - - - 235,875 253,626 Notes receivable - - - - - 403,555 403,555 Restricted cash and investments - - 14,402,021 3,186,973 3,533,950 6,202,362 27,325,306 Total assets 12,455,012$ 10,843,473$ 14,419,723$ 10,323,291$ 14,981,051$ 39,582,099$ 102,604,649$ (continued) 342 34 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA BALANCE SHEET (CONTINUED) GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS June 30, 2022 The Notes to Financial Statements are an integral part of this statement. American Other Total General Rescue Plan Street Impact SID Construction Governmental Governmental Fund Act Fee Fund Debt Service Capital Projects Funds Funds LIABILITIES AND FUND BALANCES Liabilities Accounts payable 2,416,217$ -$ 1,040,145$ 3,511$ 1,732,900$ 5,390,950$ 10,583,723$ Escheat property payable 130,718 - - - - 24,506 155,224 Accrued employee benefits 340 - - - - 1,109 1,449 Appearance bonds and other liabilities - - 160,706 - 1,797,552 - 1,958,258 Advances from other city funds - - - 693,010 - - 693,010 Due to other city funds - - - 1,109,264 - 311,239 1,420,503 Unearned revenue - 11,041,395 - - 2,122,444 - 13,163,839 Total liabilities 2,547,275 11,041,395 1,200,851 1,805,785 5,652,896 5,727,804 27,976,006 Deferred inflows of resources Unavailable revenue-property taxes 29,028 - - - - 26,928 55,956 Unavailable revenue-special assessments - - - 4,114,264 - 86,324 4,200,588 Unavailable revenue-court fines 1,277,090 - - - - - 1,277,090 Total deferred inflows of resources 1,306,118 - - 4,114,264 - 113,252 5,533,634 Fund balances Nonspendable - - - - - 1,919,979 1,919,979 Restricted - - 13,218,872 4,403,242 9,328,155 28,632,260 55,582,529 Committed - - - - - 3,168,927 3,168,927 Assigned 8,708,695 - - - - 134,135 8,842,830 Unassigned (107,076) (197,922) - - - (114,258) (419,256) Total fund balances 8,601,619 (197,922) 13,218,872 4,403,242 9,328,155 33,741,043 69,095,009 Total liabilities, deferred inflows, and fund balances 12,455,012$ 10,843,473$ 14,419,723$ 10,323,291$ 14,981,051$ 39,582,099$ 102,604,649$ 343 35 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA RECONCILIATION OF THE BALANCE SHEET OF GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS TO THE STATEMENT OF NET POSITION June 30, 2022 The Notes to Financial Statements are an integral part of this statement. Amounts reported for governmental activities in the statement of net position are different because: Fund balances - total governmental funds 69,095,009$ Capital assets and intangible right-of-use leased assets used in governmental activities are not financial resources and, therefore, are not reported in the governmental funds Governmental capital assets 409,718,951$ Less: accumulated depreciation (134,597,210) Governmental intangible right-of-use lease assets 1,014,577 Less: accumulated amortization (301,231) 275,835,087 Internal service funds are used by management to charge the costs of certain activities to individual funds. The assets and liabilities of the internal service funds are included in governmental activities in the statement of net position. Net position 1,290,788 Less: capital assets included in governmental activities (2,401,769) Plus: accumulated depreciation included in governmental activities 1,185,618 Less: intangible right-of-use leased assets included in governmental activities (423,122) Plus: accumulated amortization included in governmental activities 42,312 Plus: compensated absences included in governmental activities 261,019 Plus: lease obligations included in governmental activities 406,143 Plus: other post-employment health benefits and related deferred outflows and inflows included in governmental activities 248,441 Plus: net pension liability and related deferred outflows and inflows included in governmental activities 1,863,396 2,472,826 Deferred inflows of resources are not available to pay for current period expenditures and, therefore, are deferred in the funds.5,533,634 Deferred outflows of resources relating to pensions and other liabilities are not payable in the current period and, therefore, are not reported in the governmental funds.7,792,013 Pension plan deferrals are deferred inflows of resources on the statement of net position.(7,868,911) (500,883) Bond premiums are other financing source revenue in the governmental funds. They are a liability for the statement of net position and amortized over the life of the issuance. Bond premium (5,205,785) Less: amortization 720,821 (4,484,964) Impact fee credits do not affect current financial resources and therefore are not reported in the governmental funds.(56,343) Long-term liabilities are not due and payable in the current period and therefore are not reported in the governmental funds. Bonds and notes payable, net of bond premium (64,365,369) Net pension liability (18,544,222) Lease obligations (630,914) Other post-employment health benefits (4,196,277) Compensated absences (3,225,776) (90,962,558) Net position of governmental activities 256,854,910$ The assumption change gain in the total other post-employment benefits liability (TOL) is a deferred inflow of resources and is amortized over the expected future service life; therefore, the balance is deferred and not reported in governmental funds. 344 36 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS Year Ended June 30, 2022 The Notes to Financial Statements are an integral part of this statement. American Other Total Rescue Plan Street Impact SID Construction Governmental Governmental General Act Fee Fund Debt Service Capital Projects Funds Funds REVENUES Taxes 18,023,178$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 11,584,019$ 29,607,197$ Special assessments 931 - - 901,483 - 713,904 1,616,318 Licenses and permits 420,415 - - - - 2,429,645 2,850,060 Intergovernmental 8,816,807 1,013,635 - - - 2,808,240 12,638,682 Charges for services 4,523,191 - 8,426,720 1,704 - 17,143,622 30,095,237 Fines and forfeitures 993,493 - - - - 59,703 1,053,196 Interest on investments 36,552 8,368 60,965 14,046 153,158 179,279 452,368 Decrease in fair market value of investments (289,699) (206,290) (436,464) (78,498) (238,877) (1,088,061) (2,337,889) Interest on loans receivable - - - - - 53,539 53,539 Other 139,623 - 387,666 1,789 - 2,183,816 2,712,894 Total revenues 32,664,491 815,713 8,438,887 840,524 (85,719) 36,067,706 78,741,602 EXPENDITURES General government 9,140,826 - - - - 2,750,358 11,891,184 Public safety 18,305,074 - - - 689,185 3,110,252 22,104,511 Public service 1,434 - 545,681 - 6,223 6,423,742 6,977,080 Public welfare 5,274,990 - - - 2,506 9,321,448 14,598,944 Other 2,022,115 39,255 - - - 143,000 2,204,370 Capital outlay 565,483 - 2,679,742 - 21,700,471 5,855,879 30,801,575 Debt service Principal payments 41,797 - - 183,999 - 2,743,369 2,969,165 Interest and fiscal fees 6,010 - - 135,136 - 1,909,973 2,051,119 Total expenditures 35,357,729 39,255 3,225,423 319,135 22,398,385 32,258,021 93,597,948 Revenues over (under) expenditures (2,693,238) 776,458 5,213,464 521,389 (22,484,104) 3,809,685 (14,856,346) OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers in 4,966,165 - - 2,077,709 745,362 3,012,946 10,802,182 Transfers out (3,363,753) (974,380) - - (257,102) (7,603,923) (12,199,158) Premium on bonds issued - - - - 515,591 - 515,591 Issuance of long term debt - - - - 6,730,000 315,000 7,045,000 Issuance of lease (as lessee)19,833 - - - - - 19,833 Sale of capital assets 22,321 - - - - 12,515 34,836 Total other financing sources (uses)1,644,566 (974,380) - 2,077,709 7,733,851 (4,263,462) 6,218,284 Net change in fund balances (1,048,672) (197,922) 5,213,464 2,599,098 (14,750,253) (453,777) (8,638,062) FUND BALANCE, beginning of year 9,183,264 - 8,005,408 1,804,144 24,078,408 34,194,820 77,266,044 Restatement due to a correction of an error 467,027 - - - - - 467,027 FUND BALANCE, beginning of year as restated 9,650,291 - 8,005,408 1,804,144 24,078,408 34,194,820 77,733,071 FUND BALANCE, end of year 8,601,619$ (197,922)$ 13,218,872$ 4,403,242$ 9,328,155$ 33,741,043$ 69,095,009$ 345 37 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA RECONCILIATION OF STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES OF GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS TO THE STATEMENT OF ACTIVITIES Year Ended June 30, 2022 The Notes to Financial Statements are an integral part of this statement. Amounts reported for governmental activities in the statement of activities are different because: Net change in fund balances - total governmental funds (8,638,062)$ Governmental funds report capital outlays as expenditures. However, in the statement of activities, the cost of these assets is allocated over their estimated useful lives and reported as depreciation and amortization expense. This is the amount by which capital outlays and donated infrastructure exceeded depreciation expense in the current period. Expenditures for capital assets 30,781,742$ Expenditures for intangible right-of-use leased assets 19,833 Donated assets 12,153,695 Less: current year depreciation and amortization (7,864,793) 35,090,477 Governmental funds report asset disposals as sale of capital assets for the cash received. In the statement of activities, those gains and losses must be adjusted by the assets basis, net of any depreciation.(50,571) The issuance of long-term debt (e.g. bonds, leases) provides current financial resources to governmental funds, while the repayment of the principal of long-term debt consumes the current financial resources of governmental funds. Neither transaction, however, has any effect on net position. Also, governmental funds report the effect of premiums, discounts, and similar items when debt is first issued, whereas these amounts are deferred and amortized in the statement of activities, unless immaterial. This amount is the net effect of these differences in the treatment of long-term debt and related items.(4,382,801) Some revenues reported in the statement of activities do not require the use of current financial resources and, therefore, are not reported as revenues in governmental funds. The change in deferred inflows of resources is presented in the statement of activities.(886,360) Governmental funds do not report a liability for compensated absences. The change in the liability is presented in the statement of activities.27,748 Governmental funds do not report a liability for other post-employment health benefits. The change in the liability is presented in the statement of activities.(375,325) Contributions to the pension plans in the current fiscal year are deferred outflows in the statement of net position. The change in the deferred outflows for pension plan contributions presented in the statement of activities.717,669 Internal service funds are used by management to charge the costs of certain activities to individual funds. The net revenue (expense) of the internal service funds is reported in the governmental activities.879,190 Change in net position of governmental activities 22,381,965$ 346 PROPRIETARY FUND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 347 MAJOR PROPRIETARY FUNDS These funds are used to account for the financing, acquisition, operation and maintenance of water, sewer, and solid waste facilities, which are supported by user charges. Major Enterprise Funds – Water Fund – Accounts for the City’s water utility operations and to collect and administer water impact fees. Waste Water Fund – Accounts for the City’s sewer utility operations and to collect and administer waste water impact fees. Internal Service Funds – used to account for the goods and services provided by one department to other departments of the City on a cost-reimbursement basis. 348 38 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA STATEMENT OF NET POSITION PROPRIETARY FUNDS June 30, 2022 The Notes to Financial Statements are an integral part of this statement. Governmental Activities Waste Nonmajor Internal Water Fund Water Fund Enterprise Funds Total Service Funds ASSETS Current assets Cash and investments 20,593,439$ 5,174,010$ 3,919,298$ 29,686,747$ 3,010,670$ Receivables: Accrued interest 44,148 15,655 5,600 65,403 - Customers, net 681,283 791,745 760,610 2,233,638 23,863 Special assessments 22 - 494 516 - Other governments 843,241 267,066 - 1,110,307 - Prepaid expenses - - - - 466,536 Total current assets 22,162,133 6,248,476 4,686,002 33,096,611 3,501,069 Non-current assets Other assets: Restricted cash and investments 16,341,951 7,722,507 790,676 24,855,134 - Total other assets 16,341,951 7,722,507 790,676 24,855,134 - Property, plant and equipment Nondepreciable: Land 573,847 1,112,597 532,109 2,218,553 - Water rights 2,762,142 - - 2,762,142 - Construction in progress 2,198,049 21,425,943 429,170 24,053,162 - Depreciable: Buildings 40,703,019 60,481,476 12,724,848 113,909,343 1,546,120 Other structures and improvements 13,646,910 14,745,401 2,155,300 30,547,611 - Machinery and equipment 1,814,425 3,659,862 7,925,305 13,399,592 630,754 Vehicles 665,045 723,533 936,639 2,325,217 224,895 Infrastructure 215,039,779 143,627,680 6,884,733 365,552,192 - Accumulated depreciation (119,418,353) (91,025,528) (14,656,859) (225,100,740) (1,185,619) Net property, plant and equipment 157,984,863 154,750,964 16,931,245 329,667,072 1,216,150 Intangible right-of-use leased assets Leased building - - - - 423,122 Less: accumulated amortization - - - - (42,312) Net intangible right-of-use leased assets - - - - 380,810 Total non-current assets 174,326,814 162,473,471 17,721,921 354,522,206 1,596,960 Deferred outflows of resources Other post-employment benefits 79,810 70,196 97,855 247,861 90,659 Pension plan contributions 336,981 295,177 365,334 997,492 400,264 Total deferred outflows of resources 416,791 365,373 463,189 1,245,353 490,923 Total assets and deferred outflows of resources 196,905,738$ 169,087,320$ 22,871,112$ 388,864,170$ 5,588,952$ (continued) Enterprise Funds Business-type Activities 349 39 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA STATEMENT OF NET POSITION (CONTINUED) PROPRIETARY FUNDS June 30, 2022 The Notes to Financial Statements are an integral part of this statement. Governmental Activities Waste Nonmajor Internal Water Fund Water Fund Enterprise Funds Total Service Funds LIABILITIES Current liabilities Accounts payable and accrued expenses 908,717$ 735,026$ 884,173$ 2,527,916$ 236,435$ Compensated absences payable 127,721 160,864 166,532 455,117 261,019 Due to other city funds - - - - 791,807 Lease obligations due in one year - - - - 70,968 Closure and post-closure care costs, current portion - - 310,773 310,773 - Bonds, notes, and loans payable 1,318,000 1,993,321 84,000 3,395,321 - Total current liabilities 2,354,438 2,889,211 1,445,478 6,689,127 1,360,229 Noncurrent liabilities Closure and post-closure care costs - - 864,259 864,259 - Revenue bonds due after one year 15,949,000 25,939,000 1,196,000 43,084,000 - Compensated absences payable 57,105 - 42,393 99,498 - Lease obligations - - - - 335,175 Other post-employment health benefits implicit rate subsidy 262,710 275,801 332,328 870,839 311,497 Solvent site remediation liability - 782,927 - 782,927 - Net pension liability 1,340,781 1,174,452 1,453,595 3,968,828 1,541,801 Total noncurrent liabilities 17,609,596 28,172,180 3,888,575 49,670,351 2,188,473 Total liabilities 19,964,034 31,061,391 5,334,053 56,359,478 3,548,702 Deferred inflows of resources Other post-employment benefits 25,645 34,551 36,812 97,008 27,603 Pension deferrals 573,333 502,209 621,574 1,697,116 721,859 Total deferred inflows of resources 598,978 536,760 658,386 1,794,124 749,462 NET POSITION Net investment in capital assets 141,616,640 129,135,740 15,709,533 286,461,913 810,007 Committed for drought reserve 576,282 - - 576,282 - Restricted for impact capital projects 15,432,602 9,984,007 - 25,416,609 - Restricted for infrastructure capital projects 516,859 - - 516,859 - Restricted for parking capital projects - - 130,316 130,316 - Restricted for debt service 898,774 2,317,095 58,288 3,274,157 - Unrestricted 17,301,569 (3,947,673) 980,536 14,334,432 480,781 Total net position 176,342,726 137,489,169 16,878,673 330,710,568 1,290,788 Total liabilities, deferred inflows of resources, and net position 196,905,738$ 169,087,320$ 22,871,112$ 388,864,170$ 5,588,952$ Enterprise Funds Business-type Activities 350 40 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENSES AND CHANGES IN NET POSITION PROPRIETARY FUNDS Year Ended June 30, 2022 The Notes to Financial Statements are an integral part of this statement. Governmental Activities Waste Nonmajor Internal Water Fund Water Fund Enterprise Funds Totals Service Funds OPERATING REVENUES 11,613,448$ 10,389,216$ 8,166,881$ 30,169,545$ 11,892,029$ OPERATING EXPENSES Salaries and benefits 2,420,665 2,064,539 2,705,376 7,190,580 3,129,925 Materials and supplies 971,213 411,308 563,241 1,945,762 876,829 Repairs and maintenance 119,324 194,446 397,415 711,185 41,462 Utilities 291,548 705,756 687,961 1,685,265 33,108 Administrative charges 2,260,363 1,942,774 1,312,710 5,515,847 529,084 Insurance claims - - - - 5,230,702 Other expenses 1,805,590 1,288,369 1,023,856 4,117,815 977,825 Depreciation and amortization 3,219,693 3,513,095 1,133,372 7,866,160 176,099 Changes in estimated closure and post-closure care costs - - (33,087) (33,087) - Total operating expenses 11,088,396 10,120,287 7,790,844 28,999,527 10,995,034 Operating income 525,052 268,929 376,037 1,170,018 896,995 NON-OPERATING REVENUES (EXPENSES) Interest income 230,073 63,673 27,898 321,644 12,651 Decrease in fair market value of investments (1,088,863) (386,164) (138,192) (1,613,219) (87,463) Interest expense (515,842) (729,704) (33,538) (1,279,084) (7,662) Other income 110,270 74,685 34,814 219,769 14,124 Intergovernmental income 1,167,859 301,258 42,319 1,511,436 50,545 Impact fees 3,817,737 2,295,758 - 6,113,495 - Gain on disposal of assets 1,031 - - 1,031 - Total non-operating revenues 3,722,265 1,619,506 (66,699) 5,275,072 (17,805) Income before contributions and transfers 4,247,317 1,888,435 309,338 6,445,090 879,190 Contributions of infrastructure - developers 6,187,591 5,879,308 997,563 13,064,462 - Transfers in 843,241 - 553,735 1,396,976 - Change in net position 11,278,149 7,767,743 1,860,636 20,906,528 879,190 NET POSITION, beginning of year 165,064,577 129,721,426 15,018,037 309,804,040 411,598 NET POSITION, end of year 176,342,726$ 137,489,169$ 16,878,673$ 330,710,568$ 1,290,788$ Enterprise Funds Business-type Activities 351 41 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS PROPRIETARY FUNDS Year Ended June 30, 2022 The Notes to Financial Statements are an integral part of this statement. Governmental Activities Waste Nonmajor Internal Water Fund Water Fund Funds Total Service Funds CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES Non-cash investment activity (1,088,863)$ (386,164)$ (138,192)$ (1,613,219)$ (87,463)$ Receipts from customers 11,620,945 10,089,648 8,086,574 29,797,167 11,888,074 Receipts from others (732,971) 74,685 57,304 (600,982) 14,124 Operating loans from other City funds - - - - 159,023 Payments to suppliers (2,655,859) (3,950,203) (2,881,006) (9,487,068) (2,089,489) Payments to employees (2,466,910) (2,170,842) (2,723,141) (7,360,893) (8,291,452) Payments to internal service funds and administrative fees (2,260,363) (1,942,774) (1,312,710) (5,515,847) (529,084) Net cash flows from operating activities 2,415,979 1,714,350 1,088,829 5,219,158 1,063,733 CASH FLOWS FROM NON-CAPITAL FINANCING ACTIVITIES Transfers in 843,241 - 553,735 1,396,976 - Receipts from grants and intergovernmental sources 1,167,859 301,258 42,319 1,511,436 50,545 Net cash flows from non-capital financing activities 2,011,100 301,258 596,054 2,908,412 50,545 CASH FLOWS FROM CAPITAL AND RELATED FINANCING ACTIVITIES Acquisition of capital assets (4,251,425) (3,342,947) (559,867) (8,154,239) (84,247) Principal paid on bonds, interfund loans, loans and leases (1,290,585) (1,951,000) (82,000) (3,323,585) (31,986) Interest paid on bonds, interfund loans, loans and leases (515,842) (729,704) (33,538) (1,279,084) (7,662) Proceeds from issuance of long-term debt - 5,300,734 - 5,300,734 - Impact fees received 3,817,737 2,295,758 - 6,113,495 - Proceeds from sale of property, plant and equipment - - - - - Net cash flows from capital and related financing activities (2,240,115) 1,572,841 (675,405) (1,342,679) (123,895) CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES Interest on investments 207,363 49,486 25,265 282,114 12,651 Net cash flows from investing activities 207,363 49,486 25,265 282,114 12,651 Net change in cash and investments 2,394,327 3,637,935 1,034,743 7,067,005 1,003,034 Cash and investments, beginning of year 34,541,063 9,258,581 3,675,231 47,474,875 2,007,636 Cash and investments, end of year 36,935,390$ 12,896,516$ 4,709,974$ 54,541,880$ 3,010,670$ Classified as: Cash and investments 20,593,439$ 5,174,010$ 3,919,298$ 29,686,747$ 3,010,670$ Restricted cash and investments 16,341,951 7,722,507 790,676 24,855,134 - Totals 36,935,390$ 12,896,517$ 4,709,974$ 54,541,881$ 3,010,670$ (continued) Business-type Activities Enterprise Funds 352 42 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS (CONTINUED) PROPRIETARY FUNDS Year Ended June 30, 2022 The Notes to Financial Statements are an integral part of this statement. Governmental Activities Waste Nonmajor Internal Water Fund Water Fund Funds Total Service Funds RECONCILIATION OF OPERATING INCOME TO NET CASH FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES Operating income 525,052$ 268,929$ 376,037$ 1,170,018$ 896,995$ Adjustments to reconcile operating income (loss) to net cash flows from operating activities Depreciation and amortization 3,219,693 3,513,095 1,133,372 7,866,160 176,099 Change in estimated closure and - post-closure care costs - - (310,773) (310,773) - Change in solvent site remediation obligation - (107,217) - (107,217) - Other income 110,270 74,685 34,814 219,769 15,677 Non-cash fair market value decrease of investments (1,088,863) (386,164) (138,192) (1,613,219) (87,463) Gain (loss) on disposal of assets 1,031 - - 1,031 - Change in assets and liabilities: (Increase) Decrease in: Accounts receivable 6,466 (299,568) (80,307) (373,409) 3,151 Due from other governments (843,241) (843,241) - Prepaid expenses - - - - (41,018) Other governments receivable - - 22,490 22,490 - Increase (Decrease) in:- Accounts payable 531,816 (1,243,107) 69,153 (642,138) (71,484) Due from other city funds - - - - 159,023 Accrued employee benefits payable 24,158 23,690 42,265 90,113 101,536 Net pension (70,403) (129,993) (60,030) (260,426) (88,783) Total adjustments 1,890,927 1,445,421 712,792 4,049,140 166,738 Net cash flows from operating activities 2,415,979$ 1,714,350$ 1,088,829$ 5,219,158$ 1,063,733$ SUPPLEMENTAL CASH FLOW INFORMATION Noncash transactions: Transferred property, plant and equipment 22,196$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Building acquired through leasing activities - - - - 423,122 Decrease in fair-market value of investments (1,088,863) (386,164) (138,192) (1,613,219) (87,463) Donated infrastructure 6,187,591 5,879,308 997,563 13,064,462 - Total noncash transactions 5,120,924$ 5,493,144$ 859,371$ 11,451,243$ 335,659$ Enterprise Funds Business-type Activities 353 FIDUCIARY FUND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 354 FIDUCIARY FUNDS CUSTODIAL FUNDS Custodial funds are used to account for assets held by the City as an agent for individuals, private organizations, and other governments. Custodial funds are used to report fiduciary activities that are not required to be reported in pension (or other employee benefit) trust funds, investment trust funds, or private-purpose trust funds. The following custodial funds are included in the Fiduciary Fund financial statements: Tourism Business Improvement District – Accounts for amounts collected from hotels on behalf of the District, a special-purpose government, whose purpose is to enhance the economic vitality of Bozeman by promoting tourism through sales and marketing strategies. Municipal Court – Accounts for monies held for appearance bonds and restitution to criminal arrests and reimbursement for damage caused. . 355 43 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA STATEMENT OF FIDUCIARY NET POSITION FIDUCIARY FUNDS June 30, 2022 The Notes to Financial Statements are an integral part of this statement. Custodial Funds ASSETS Cash and cash equivalents 633,962$ Customer receivables 2,692 Total assets 636,654$ LIABILITIES Accounts payable 589,447 NET POSITION Restricted for other organizations 47,207 Total liabilities and net position 636,654$ 356 44 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN FIDUCIARY NET POSITION FIDUCIARY FUNDS Year Ended June 30, 2022 The Notes to Financial Statements are an integral part of this statement. Custodial Funds ADDITIONS Contributions Interest income -$ DEDUCTIONS Miscellaneous - Change in net position - NET POSITION - Beginning of Year 47,207 NET POSITION - End of Year 47,207$ 357 NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 358 45 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS June 30, 2022 NOTE 1. SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES The City of Bozeman of Gallatin County, Montana (the City) was incorporated as a municipal corporation in 1883. The present City Code of Ordinances was adopted October 3, 2011. Under the charter, the City is governed by a mayor and commission members who comprise the City Commission. The day-to-day affairs of the City are conducted under the supervision of the City Manager, who is appointed by and serves at the pleasure of a majority of the City Commission. The accompanying financial statements of the City have been prepared in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) as prescribed by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB), the accepted standard-setting body for establishing governmental accounting and financial reporting principles. In June 1999 the GASB issued Statement 34 Basic Financial Statements-and Management’s Discussion and Analysis-for State and Local Governments (GASB 34). This Statement establishes financial reporting requirements for state and local governments throughout the United States. The accompanying financial statements present the financial position of the City and the various funds and fund types, the results of operations of the City and the various funds and fund types, and the cash flows of the proprietary funds. The financial statements are presented as of June 30, 2022, and for the year then ended. The more significant accounting policies of the City are described below. Restatement The City has corrected an error in the prior year related to the improper accounting for Notes Receivable. The City determined that $467,027 was improperly expensed in the General Fund instead of recorded as a note receivable and accounts receivable. Accordingly, beginning net position for the government-wide governmental activities and beginning fund balance for the General Fund has been restated to reflect the accounting error. The following table summarizes the impact of the restatement: Net Position Receivables, Net Notes Receivable General Government Expenses June 30, 2021, as originally reported 234,005,918$ 11,613,455$ 455,624$ 11,517,404$ Restatement due to correction of an error 467,027 351,122 115,903 (467,027) June 30, 2021, as restated 234,472,945$ 11,964,577$ 571,527$ 11,050,377$ Fund Balance Customer Receivables, Net Notes Receivable General Government Expenditures June 30, 2021, as originally reported 9,183,264$ 2,176,579$ -$ 8,178,413$ Restatement due to correction of an error 467,027 351,122 115,903 (467,027) June 30, 2021, as restated 9,650,291$ 2,527,701$ 115,903$ 7,711,386$ Government-Wide Governmental Activities General Fund 359 46 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 1. SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (CONTINUED) New Accounting Pronouncement The City implemented GASB Statement No. 87, Leases for the year ended June 30, 2022. The goal of this statement is to better meet information needs of financial statement users by improving accounting and financial reporting for leases by governments. This statement increases the usefulness of governments’ financial statements by requiring recognition of certain lease assets and liabilities for leases that previously were classified as operating leases and recognized as inflows of resources or outflows of resources based on the payment provisions of the contract. It establishes a single model for lease accounting based on the foundational principle that leases are financings of the right to use an underlying asset. Under this statement, a lessee is required to recognize a lease liability and an intangible right-of-use lease asset, and a lessor is required to recognize a lease receivable and a deferred inflow of resources, thereby enhancing the relevance and consistency of information about governments’ leasing activities. The implementation of GASB 87 did not impact how the City is accounting for its existing capital leases at the beginning of the year and did not result in a cumulative impact adjustment to beginning net position. Reporting Entity The City has considered all potential component units for which it is financially accountable and other organizations for which the nature and significance of their relationship with the City are such that exclusion would cause the City’s financial statements to be misleading or incomplete. The Governmental Accounting Standards Board has set forth criteria to be considered in determining financial accountability in Statement 14 The Financial Reporting Entity and Statement 61, The Financial Reporting Entity: Omnibus – an Amendment of GASB Statements No. 14 and No. 34. These criteria include appointing a voting majority of an organization's governing body and (1) the ability of the City to impose its will on that organization or (2) the potential for the organization to provide specific financial benefits to, or impose specific financial burdens on the City. Although the Bozeman Public Library Board of Trustees and the Parking Commission meet the requirements of Statement 61, they are strictly advisory in nature. Therefore, the government-wide financial statements do not include the financial information of the these entities and their omission does not cause the City’s financial statements to be misleading or incomplete. Should there develop a financial element at some point in the future, the City shall include these entities on its government-wide financial statements. . 360 47 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 1. SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (CONTINUED) Basis of Accounting/Measurement Focus The accounts of the City are organized on the basis of funds, each of which is considered a separate accounting entity. The operations of each fund are accounted for with a separate set of self-balancing accounts that comprise its assets, liabilities, fund equity, revenues and expenditures, or expenses, as appropriate. Governmental resources are allocated to and accounted for in individual funds based upon the purposes for which they are to be spent and the means by which spending activities are controlled. Government-Wide Financial Statements The Government-Wide Financial Statements (the Statement of Net Position and the Statement of Activities) present information of all the non-fiduciary activities of the primary government and its component units. These statements present summaries of Governmental and Business-Type Activities for the City accompanied by a total column. These statements are presented on an “economic resources” measurement focus and the accrual basis of accounting. Accordingly, all of the City’s assets and liabilities, including capital assets and long-term liabilities, are included in the accompanying Statement of Net Position. The City has retroactively included infrastructure in its assets. The Statement of Activities presents changes in Net Position. Under the accrual basis of accounting, revenues are recognized in the period in which they are earned while expenses are recognized in the period in which the liability is incurred. The types of transactions reported as program revenues for the City are reported in three categories: 1) charges for services, 2) operating grants and contributions, and 3) capital grants and contributions. Certain eliminations have been made as prescribed by GASB 34 in regards to inter-fund activities, payables, and receivables. All internal balances in the Statement of Net Position have been eliminated, except those representing balances between the governmental activities and the business-type activities, which are presented as internal balances and eliminated in the total primary government column. In the Statement of Activities, internal service fund transactions have been eliminated; however, those transactions between governmental and business-type activities have not been eliminated. The City applies all applicable GASB pronouncements including all National Council on Governmental Accounting Statements and Interpretations currently in effect. Governmental Fund Financial Statements Governmental Fund Financial Statements include a Balance Sheet and a Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances for all major governmental funds and nonmajor funds aggregated. An accompanying schedule is presented to reconcile and explain the differences in fund balances and changes in fund balances as presented in these statements to the net position and changes in net position presented in the Government-Wide Financial Statements. The City has presented all major funds that met those qualifications. 361 48 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 1. SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (CONTINUED) Basis of Accounting/Measurement Focus (Continued) Governmental Fund Financial Statements (Continued) All governmental funds are accounted for on a spending or “current financial resources” measurement focus and the modified accrual basis of accounting. Accordingly, only current assets and current liabilities are included on the Balance Sheets. The Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances present increases (revenues and other financing sources) and decreases (expenditures and other financing uses) in current net position. Under the modified accrual basis of accounting, revenues are recognized in the accounting period in which they become both measurable and available to finance expenditures of the current period. Accordingly, revenues are recorded when received in cash, except that revenues subject to accrual (generally 60 days after year-end) are recognized when due. The primary revenue sources which have been treated as susceptible to accrual by the City are property taxes, intergovernmental revenues, and other taxes. Expenditures are recorded in the accounting period in which the related fund liability is incurred. The City has elected to apply the early recognition option of recognizing debt services expenditures provided by GASB Interpretation No. 6, Recognition and Measurement of Certain Liabilities and Expenditures in Governmental Fund Financial Statements. Under this option, an expenditure and a liability are recorded in debt service funds in the current year for amounts due early in the following year, for which resources have been provided during the current year. Proprietary Fund Financial Statements Proprietary Fund Financial Statements include a Statement of Net Position, a Statement of Revenues, Expenses, and Changes in Net Position, and a Statement of Cash Flows for each major proprietary fund. A column representing internal service funds is also presented with the Proprietary Fund Financial Statements. Internal service balances and activities, however, have been combined with the governmental activities in the Government-Wide Financial Statements. Proprietary funds are accounted for using the “economic resources” measurement focus and the accrual basis of accounting. Accordingly, all assets and liabilities (whether current or noncurrent) are included on the Statement of Net Position. The Statement of Revenues, Expenses, and Changes in Net Position present increases (revenues) and decreases (expenses) in total net position. Under the accrual basis of accounting, revenues are recognized in the period in which they are earned while expenses are recognized in the period in which the liability is incurred. Operating revenues in the proprietary funds are those revenues that are generated from the primary operations of the fund. All other revenues are reported as non-operating revenues. Operating expenses are those expenses that are essential to the primary operations of the fund. All other expenses are reported as non-operating expenses. 362 49 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 1. SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (CONTINUED) Basis of Accounting/Measurement Focus (Continued) Fiduciary Fund Financial Statements Fiduciary Fund Financial Statements include a Statement of Fiduciary Net Position and a Statement of Changes in Fiduciary Net Position. The City’s Fiduciary Funds represent custodial funds. Custodial funds are custodial in nature (assets equal liabilities) and use the economic resources measurement focus. These funds are accounted for using the accrual basis of accounting. The following custodial funds are included in the Fiduciary Fund financial statements: Tourism Business Improvement District – Accounts for amounts collected from hotels on behalf of the District, a special-purpose government, whose purpose is to enhance the economic vitality of Bozeman by promoting tourism through sales and marketing strategies. Municipal Court Fund – Accounts for monies held for appearance bonds and restitution related to criminal arrests and reimbursement for damage caused. Internal Service Funds Internal Service Funds are used to account for goods and services provided by one department to other departments of the City on a cost-reimbursement basis. These direct costs and certain indirect costs are included as part of the program expense reported for the individual functions and activities of these other departments. The following Internal Service Funds are included in the Proprietary Fund Financial Statements: Vehicle Maintenance Shop – Accounts for the maintenance and repair of vehicles used in the operation of City services. Medical Health Insurance – Accounts for insurance premium revenues received from the various City departments and retirees, and the related costs of health, vision, and dental insurance premiums incurred by City employees and retirees. Public Works Administration – Accounts for the professional level management, engineering, and GIS technical support provided to other Public Works divisions, including water, wastewater, solid waste, stormwater, in addition to support provided to other City departments. 363 50 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 1. SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (CONTINUED) Funds As mentioned, the Governmental Fund Financial Statements include a Balance Sheet and a Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances for all major governmental funds and nonmajor funds aggregated. The following major funds are presented in separate columns on the Governmental Funds Financial Statements, and the Proprietary Funds Financial Statements, respectively: Governmental Funds General Fund – this fund accounts for the financial operations of the City, which are not accounted for in any other fund. Principal sources of revenue are property taxes, state and local shared revenues, licenses and permits, and charges for services provided to other funds. Principal expenditures in the General Fund are made for police and fire protection, public welfare, and general government. American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) Special Revenue Fund - This fund accounts for the ARPA federal grant program. Grant funds must be used for the stated purpose of the grant and must meet grantor expenditure guidelines. Street Impact Fees Special Revenue Fund – Accounts for the collection and expenditures associated with the street impact fees. Special Improvement District (SID) Debt Service – Accounts for the accumulation of resources and payment of special assessment bond principal and interest related to general improvement, sidewalk, and curb construction projects. Construction Capital Projects Fund – Accounts for the construction of general improvement projects financed by special assessments other than those financed by proprietary funds. Proprietary Funds Water Fund – Accounts for the City's water utility operations and to collect and administer water impact fees. Waste Water Fund – Accounts for the City's sewer utility operations and to collect and administer waste water impact fees. Use of Estimates The preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect certain reported amounts and disclosures. Accordingly, actual results could differ from those estimates. Use of Restricted/Unrestricted Net Position When an expense is incurred for purposes for which both restricted and unrestricted net position are available, the City’s policy is to apply restricted net position first. Cash and Investments Cash and investments are under the management of the City's Treasurer and consist primarily of demand deposits and investments in U.S. Government Bonds. Interest income earned as a result of pooling of City deposits is distributed to the appropriate funds utilizing a formula based on the average balance of cash and investments of each fund. 364 51 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 1. SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (CONTINUED) Cash and Investments (Continued) Montana State statutes authorize the City to invest in interest-bearing savings accounts, certificates of deposits, and time deposits insured up to $250,000 by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or fully collateralized, U.S. government and U.S. agency obligations and repurchase agreements where there is a master repurchase agreement and collateral held by a third party. Restricted Cash and Investments Restricted cash and investments are those whose use is restricted to specific purposes by state statute, bond indenture, or otherwise. The City’s restricted cash and investments are primarily restricted for construction and maintenance of City infrastructure, debt service and urban renewal. Investments Fair Value The City categorizes its fair value measurements within the fair value hierarchy established by generally accepted accounting principles. The hierarchy is based on the valuation inputs used to measure the fair value of the asset. Level 1 inputs are quoted prices in active markets for identical assets (these investments are valued using prices quoted in active markets); Level 2 inputs are significant other observable inputs (these investments are valued using matrix pricing); Level 3 inputs are significant unobservable inputs (these investments are valued using consensus pricing). Eliminations and Reclassifications In the process of aggregating data for the Statement of Net Position and the Statement of Activities, some amounts reported as inter-fund activity and balances in the funds have been eliminated or reclassified. Internal service fund activity has also been eliminated in the Statement of Activities to remove the “doubling-up” effect. Capital Assets The City’s assets are capitalized at historical cost or estimated historical cost. City policy has set the capitalization threshold for reporting capital assets at $5,000. Donated capital assets, donated works of art and similar items, and capital assets received in a service concession arrangement are reported at acquisition value. Depreciable capital assets are reported on the Statement of Net Position, net of applicable accumulated depreciation. Capital assets, which are not depreciable such as land, and construction in progress are reported separately. Depreciation expense is reported in the Statement of Activities and is calculated using the straight-line method based on the assets estimated useful life. Depreciation is recorded on a straight-line basis over the useful lives of the assets as follows: Vehicles 5 to 10 years Machinery and equipment 5 to 30 years Buildings 20 to 80 years Other structures and improvements 10 to 100 years Infrastructure 25 to 100 years 365 52 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 1. SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (CONTINUED) Capital Assets (Continued) In accordance with GASB 34, the City has recorded infrastructure assets prospectively from 2005, the date of implementation, and has included infrastructure acquired prior to implementation within the four-year required period. The City defines infrastructure as the basic physical assets that allow the City to function. These assets include the street system, comprised of roads, sidewalks, curbs, and street lights; the water purification and distribution system; the sewer collection and treatment system; park and recreation lands and related improvements; stormwater conveyance system; and buildings and site amenities, including parking and landscaped areas. The costs of normal maintenance and repairs that do not add to the value of the asset or materially extend asset lives are not capitalized. Improvements are capitalized and depreciated over the remaining useful lives of the related capital assets, as applicable. Compensated Absences Payable Earned but unpaid vacation and sick pay is included as a liability in the proprietary fund types and Government-Wide Financial Statements. The portion relating to the governmental fund types not expected to be paid with expendable, and available resources is not reported in the governmental fund statements unless the liability has matured (i.e., unused reimbursable leave still outstanding following an employee's resignation or retirement). Inter-fund Receivables and Payables During the course of operations, numerous transactions occur between individual funds that may result in amounts owed between funds. Those short-term loans related to goods- and services-type transactions are classified as “due to and from other funds.” Long-term inter-fund loans (noncurrent portion) are reported as “advances to and from other funds.” Inter-fund receivables and payables between funds are eliminated in the Statement of Net Position. On-Behalf Payments for Fringe Benefits On-behalf payments for fringe benefits are direct payments made by one entity to a third-party recipient for the employees of another legally separate entity. On-behalf payments include pension plan contributions. The State's pension contribution is recorded as intergovernmental revenue with an offsetting public safety or general government expenditure in the Pension Special Revenue Fund (see Note 15). Budgets Each year, the City Manager must submit to the City Commission a proposed operating budget for all budget units within the City for the fiscal year commencing July 1. This operating budget includes proposed expenditures and the means of financing them. Public hearings are conducted to obtain citizen comments on the proposed budget. The budget is then legally adopted through passage of the appropriation resolution by the City Commission. The City adopts a final budget each June and amends the budget in August if the initial taxable value estimates were significantly different from the final Certified Values received from the State. 366 53 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 1. SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (CONTINUED) Budgets (Continued) Budgets are legally required for all governmental fund types. These budgets are prepared on the same basis and using the same accounting practices as are used to account and prepare financial reports for the funds. Budgets presented in this report for comparison to actual amounts are presented in accordance with GAAP. Annual appropriated budgets are adopted for all funds and all appropriations lapse at year-end. The level of budgetary control (that is the level at which expenditures cannot legally exceed the appropriated amount) is established at the fund level. The City Commission may amend the budget during the course of the fiscal year. Montana state statute provides a number of different ways to amend the budget. The first involves a reallocation of existing appropriations among the line items within a specific fund. The second defines a series of scenarios where the governing body has authority to amend the budget without a hearing for donations, land sales, and fee‐based budgets. All other increases in appropriation authority that are not specifically permitted by statute must be approved through a public hearing process. Any accruing revenue of the municipality not appropriated and any balance at any time remaining after the purpose of an appropriation has been satisfied or abandoned, may from time to time be appropriated to other uses that do not conflict with any uses for which specifically the revenue was accrued. A public hearing is required for an overall increase in appropriation authority, except in the case of an emergency. In its annual appropriation resolution, the City Commission delegated budget amendment authority to the City Manager for the expenditure of funds from any or all of the following: debt service funds, enterprise funds, internal service funds, trust funds, federal and state grants accepted and approved by the governing body, special assessments, and donations. In all other funds, the City Manager may, without approval from the City Commission, make budget amendments as long as the total appropriation for the department is not exceeded. Spending control is established by the total amount of expenditures budgeted for the fund, but management may exercise control at budgetary line items. Fund Balance In accordance with GASB Statement 54, the City reports fund balance for governmental funds in two general classifications, nonspendable and spendable. Nonspendable represents the portion of fund balance that is not in spendable form, such as inventories, and, in the general fund, long-term notes and loans receivable. Spendable fund balance is further categorized as restricted, committed, assigned, and unassigned. The restricted fund balance category contains balances that can be spent only for the specific purposes stipulated by external parties or through enabling legislation. External parties include grantors, debt covenants, votes, and laws and regulations of other governments. 367 54 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 1. SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (CONTINUED) Fund Balance (Continued) The committed fund balance category includes amounts that can be used only for the specific purposes determined by a formal action of the government’s highest level of decision-making authority, the City Commission. The City Commission needs to formally adopt a Resolution in order to establish, modify, or rescind a fund balance commitment. Amounts in the assigned fund balance classification are intended to be used by the government for specific purposes but do not meet the criteria to be classified as restricted or committed. The City’s policy to authorize the assignment of fund balance is as follows: Assigned Fund Balance can be expressed and authorized directly by the City Commission or by an official to whom the Commission delegates the authority. The City Commission delegates this authority to the City Manager. The amount of General Fund balance presented on page 33 has been assigned this fiscal year. Included in the assigned fund balance for the general fund are assignments for the portion of the current general fund balance that is projected to be used to fund expenditures and other cash outflows in excess of the expected revenues and other cash inflows projected for the next fiscal year. Unassigned fund balance is the residual classification for the government’s general fund and includes all spendable amounts not contained in the other classifications. In other funds, the unassigned classification should be used only to report a deficit balance resulting from overspending for specific purposes for which amounts had been restricted, committed, or assigned. When both restricted and unrestricted resources are available, spending will occur in the following order, for the identified fund types: General Fund: Restricted, Committed, Assigned, Unassigned Special Revenue Funds: Restricted, Committed, Assigned Debt Service Funds: Assigned, Committed, Restricted Capital Projects Funds: Restricted, Committed, Assigned Minimum General Fund – Fund Balance The City does not maintain a stabilization fund. However, the City’s Charter requires an established minimum level of “General Fund Unreserved Fund Balance,” in accordance with the Government Finance Officers’ Association (GFOA) Best Practices, of 2 months or 16.67%, of operating revenues. 368 55 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 1. SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (CONTINUED) Net Position In funds other than governmental, net position represents the difference between assets and liabilities. Net investment in capital assets consists of capital assets, net of accumulated depreciation, reduced by the outstanding balances of any borrowing used for the acquisition, construction, or improvement of those assets. Net position is reported as restricted when there are limitations imposed on its use either through enabling legislation or through external restrictions imposed by creditors, grantors, or laws and regulations of other governments. NOTE 2. CASH AND INVESTMENTS At June 30, 2022, the carrying amount of the City's deposits in local banks and investments is $147,904,088. Interest bearing account balances are covered by the Federal Depository Insurance Corporation (FDIC) up to $250,000 per bank, per depositor. In addition, all noninterest bearing transaction account balances are fully insured by FDIC coverage. Interest bearing account balances not insured by FDIC coverage is $13,667,915. This remaining balance is covered by collateral held by the pledging bank's agent in the City's name. The City’s cash and investments are reported as follows: Unrestricted Restricted Total Governmental activities 65,402,938$ 27,325,307$ 92,728,245$ Business-type activities 29,686,747 24,855,134 54,541,881 Fiduciary funds - 633,962 633,962 95,089,685$ 52,814,403$ 147,904,088$ Custodial credit risk for deposits is the risk that in the event of a financial institution failure, the City’s deposits may not be returned or the City will not be able to recover the collateral securities in the possession of the outside party. The City minimizes custodial credit risk by restrictions set forth in City policy and state law. The City’s policy requires deposits to be 104 percent secured by collateral valued at market value. The City Treasurer maintains a listing of financial institutions, which are approved for investment purposes. Types of securities that may be pledged as collateral are detailed in Section 17-6-103 of the Montana Code Annotated (MCA). City policy requires that specific safeguards against risk of loss be evidenced when the City does not physically hold the securities. 369 56 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 2. CASH AND INVESTMENTS (CONTINUED) On June 30, 2022, the following interest rate risks and valuation inputs were associated with the City’s deposits and investments. Credit Risk Investment Maturities Rating Fair Value Valuation Inputs Certificates of deposit February 2021 - March 2022 NA -$ Level 2 U.S. Government bonds May 2023 - June 2027 S&P AA+71,961,430 Level 2 U.S. Bank Municipal Investment Account N/A N/A 2,306,378 Level 2 State of Montana Short Term Investment Pool Account N/A N/A 65,000,000 Demand deposits N/A N/A 8,631,192 Petty cash N/A N/A 5,088 147,904,088$ Credit risk is defined as the risk that an issuer or other counterpart to an investment that will not fulfill its obligation. The above credit risk rating indicates the probability that the issuer may default in making timely principal and interest payments. The credit ratings presented in the previous tables are provided by Standard and Poor’s Corporation (S&P). The City’s investment policy is to hold investments to maturity with the contractual understanding that these investments are low risk, locked in to a guaranteed rate of return, and are, therefore, not impacted significantly by changes in short term interest rates. The City has no formal policy relating to interest risk and no formal policy relating to credit risk. The City voluntarily participates in the STIP (Short Term Investment Pool) administered by the Montana Board of Investments (MBOI). A local government’s STIP ownership is represented by shares, the prices of which are fixed at $1.00 per share, and participants may buy or sell shares with one business days’ notice. STIP administrative expenses are charged daily against the STIP income, which is distributed on the first calendar day of each month. Shareholders have the option to automatically reinvest their distribution income in additional shares. STIP is not registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission. STIP is not FDIC insured or otherwise insured or guaranteed by the federal government, the State of Montana, the Montana Board of Investments (MBOI) or any other entity against investment losses and there is no guaranteed rate of return on funds invested in STIP shares. The MBOI maintains a reserve fund to offset possible losses and limit fluctuations in STIP’s valuation. The STIP investment portfolio consists of securities with maximum maturity of 2 years. Information on investments held in the STIP can be found in the Annual Report on the MBOI website at https://investmentmt.com/Annual-Reports. 370 57 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 3. PROPERTY TAX AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS REVENUE AND RECEIVABLES Property Taxes Real property taxes are assessed and collected each fiscal year according to the following property tax calendar: Lien Date: December 1st for the 1st installment and June 1st for the 2nd installment Levy Date: November 1st Due Dates: November 30th for the 1st installment and May 31 for the 2nd installment Personal property taxes are assessed on January 1 of each year and billed in May, with payment due within thirty days. Gallatin County collects all property taxes on behalf of the City and remits collections, including penalties and interest, on a monthly basis. The County assesses a delinquency penalty of 2%. If taxes become delinquent, the County tax collector may sell the property to collect taxes due plus 0.83% per month interest. In the fund financial statements, the City accrues as receivable all property taxes received during the first sixty (60) days of the new fiscal year from Gallatin County, in accordance with the modified accrual basis. In the government-wide financial statements, all taxes billed, but not yet collected are accrued in accordance with the full accrual basis of accounting, as described in Note 1. Special Assessments Special assessments receivable represent the uncollected amounts levied against benefited property for the cost of local improvements. Assessments are payable over a period of 18 to 20 years and bear interest of 2.5% to 5.75% per annum. Recognition of the revenues from these assessments has been deferred until both measurable and available in governmental funds. In the Government-Wide Financial Statements, however, these amounts are reported as revenues in the period they are levied. Once received, the monies will be used to meet the annual debt service requirements on related bonds and notes payable. NOTE 4. DEFERRED INFLOWS AND OUTFLOWS OF RESOURCES Deferred inflows of resources in the General Fund represent outstanding general property taxes and court fines at June 30, 2022. These amounts are reported as revenue in the Government-Wide Financial Statements in the period in which they are levied and court fines are charged. Deferred inflows in Special Revenue Funds represent either revenues received but not considered earned or amounts to be received in the future that are recorded as receivables but not yet earned. The deferred inflows in Debt Service Funds represent future assessments to be received to meet the related debt obligation. Deferred inflows and outflows in the Government-Wide Financial Statements relate to payments made on pension plans after the measurement date for the calculated pension obligations. Deferred inflows and outflows in the Government-Wide Financial Statements also relate to the implicit rate subsidy of post-employment benefits. 371 58 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 5. NOTES RECEIVABLE The City had the following notes receivable: Special Revenue Funds Economic Development Loan Fund 381,056$ Community Housing Fund 22,499 Total 403,555$ NOTE 6. CAPITAL ASSETS In accordance with GASB 34, the City has reported all capital assets, with the exception of pre-July 1, 2001, infrastructure in the Government- Wide Statement of Net Position. For the year ended June 30, 2022, depreciation expense on capital assets was charged to the functions and programs as follows: Governmental Activities: General Government 370,806$ Public Safety 917,299 Public Services 5,251,068 Public Welfare 1,500,226 Total depreciation expense - governmental activities 8,039,399$ Business-type Activities: Parking 409,185$ Stormwater 189,198 Water 3,219,693 Wastewater 3,513,095 Solid Waste 534,989 Total depreciation expense - business-type activities 7,866,160$ 372 59 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 6. CAPITAL ASSETS (CONTINUED) All capital assets of the City are depreciable with the exception of land, water rights, and construction in process, when applicable. Capital assets activity of the City for the year ended June 30, 2022, consisted of the following: June 30, 2021 Additions Disposals Transfers June 30, 2022 GOVERNMENTAL ACTIVITIES Non-depreciable: Land 33,617,853$ 3,780,155$ -$ -$ 37,398,008$ Construction in progress 30,369,287 25,624,208 - (9,193,847) 46,799,648 Depreciable: Buildings 35,501,368 25,842 - - 35,527,210 Other structures and improvements 1,145,214 - - - 1,145,214 Machinery and equipment 18,130,508 1,864,434 (143,462) - 19,851,480 Leased equipment 558,809 - - - 558,809 Leased building - 423,122 - - 423,122 Leased vehicles 12,813 19,833 - - 32,646 Vehicles 4,758,444 275,749 (134,628) (22,196) 4,877,369 Infrastructure 243,476,879 11,449,296 - 9,193,847 264,120,022 Total 367,571,175 43,462,639 (278,090) (22,196) 410,733,528 Accumulated depreciation (127,108,757) (8,039,399) 227,519 22,196 (134,898,441) Total governmental activities 240,462,418$ 35,423,240$ (50,571)$ -$ 275,835,087$ BUSINESS-TYPE ACTIVITIES Non-depreciable: Land 2,218,553$ -$ -$ -$ 2,218,553$ Water rights 2,120,142 642,000 - - 2,762,142 Construction in progress 19,200,051 4,853,111 - - 24,053,162 Depreciable: Buildings 113,873,026 36,317 - - 113,909,343 Other structures and improvements 30,547,611 - - - 30,547,611 Machinery and equipment 12,695,974 703,618 - - 13,399,592 Vehicles 2,202,192 100,829 - 22,196 2,325,217 Infrastructure 350,669,367 14,882,825 - - 365,552,192 Total 533,526,916 21,218,700 - 22,196 554,767,812 Accumulated depreciation (217,212,384) (7,866,160) - (22,196) (225,100,740) Total business-type activities 316,314,532$ 13,352,540$ -$ -$ 329,667,072$ Total capital assets 556,776,950$ 48,775,780$ (50,571)$ -$ 605,502,159$ 373 60 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 6. CAPITAL ASSETS (CONTINUED) Changes in accumulated depreciation are as follows for the year ended June 30, 2022: June 30, 2021 Additions Disposals Transfers June 30, 2022 GOVERNMENTAL ACTIVITIES Buildings (19,444,365)$ (901,457)$ -$ -$ (20,345,822)$ Other structures and improvements (1,151,401) (20,437) - - (1,171,838) Machinery and equipment (11,580,630) (1,396,442) 92,891 - (12,884,181) Leased equipment (193,657) (58,754) - - (252,411) Leased building - (42,312) - - (42,312) Leased vehicles (1,922) (4,586) - - (6,508) Vehicles (3,382,462) (283,725) 134,628 22,196 (3,509,363) Infrastructure (91,354,320) (5,331,686) - - (96,686,006) Total governmental activities (127,108,757)$ (8,039,399)$ 227,519$ 22,196$ (134,898,441)$ BUSINESS-TYPE ACTIVITIES Buildings (27,038,795)$ (2,688,720)$ -$ -$ (29,727,515)$ Other structures and improvements (29,750,628) (376,302) - - (30,126,930) Machinery and equipment (9,236,982) (828,049) - - (10,065,031) Vehicles (1,645,879) (94,395) - (22,196) (1,762,470) Infrastructure (149,540,100) (3,878,694) - - (153,418,794) Total business-type activities (217,212,384) (7,866,160) - (22,196) (225,100,740) Total accumulated depreciation (344,321,141)$ (15,905,559)$ 227,519$ -$ (359,999,181)$ NOTE 7. COMPENSATED ABSENCES The City’s policy relating to compensated absences is described in Note 1. The current portion is that which is expected to be paid within one year. This amount is estimated based on past trends and expected upcoming events. Actual amounts could differ. Historically, compensated absences and pension liabilities have been liquidated primarily by the general fund and the proprietary funds. 374 61 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 7. COMPENSATED ABSENCES (CONTINUED) Balance Balance June 30, 2021 Incurred Satisfied June 30, 2022 Compensated absences: Governmental activities 3,189,882$ 2,151,804$ (2,115,910)$ 3,225,776$ Business-type activities 554,061 404,888 (404,334) 554,615 Total compensated absences 3,743,943$ 2,556,692$ (2,520,244)$ 3,780,391$ Due within Due after one year one year Total Compensated absences: Governmental activities 2,169,321$ 1,056,455$ 3,225,776$ Business-type activities 455,117 99,498 554,615 Total compensated absences 2,624,438$ 1,155,953$ 3,780,391$ NOTE 8. LONG-TERM DEBT Governmental Activities Long-Term Debt The following is a summary of long-term debt transactions of the City’s governmental activities for the year ended June 30, 2022: Balance Issuances and Repayments Balance June 30, 2021 Additions and Deletions June 30, 2022 General obligation bonds 43,240,000$ 6,730,000$ (1,980,000)$ 47,990,000$ Tax increment financing bonds 10,763,655 - (475,085) 10,288,570 Special assessment debt 3,948,216 - (183,999) 3,764,217 Note payable 1,637,117 315,000 (65,167) 1,886,950 Intercap notes payable 609,577 - (173,945) 435,632 Bond premiums 4,198,474 515,591 (229,101) 4,484,964 Subtotal bonds and notes 64,397,039 7,560,591 (3,107,297) 68,850,333 Compensated absences 3,189,882 2,151,804 (2,115,910) 3,225,776 Lease obligations (see Note 9)310,270 442,955 (122,311) 630,914 Totals 67,897,191$ 10,155,350$ (5,345,518)$ 72,707,023$ 375 62 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 8. LONG-TERM DEBT (CONTINUED) Governmental Activities Long-Term Debt (Continued) The above long-term debt of the City’s governmental activities is presented in the accompanying Statement of Net Position as follows: Long-term Current Portion Portion (due within (due after Total one year) one year) Long-Term Debt General obligation bonds 2,225,000$ 45,765,000$ 47,990,000$ Tax increment financing bonds 485,803 9,802,767 10,288,570 Special assessment debt 189,799 3,574,418 3,764,217 Note payable 67,627 1,819,323 1,886,950 Intercap notes payable 109,245 326,387 435,632 Bond premiums 254,822 4,230,142 4,484,964 Subtotal bonds and notes 3,332,296 65,518,037 68,850,333 Compensated absences 2,169,321 1,056,455 3,225,776 Lease obligations (see Note 9)246,930 383,984 630,914 Totals 5,748,547$ 66,958,476$ 72,707,023$ General Obligation Bonds - The City issues general obligation bonds to provide funds for the acquisition and construction of major capital assets. General obligation bonds are direct obligations of the City and are backed by the full faith and credit of the City. General obligation bonds currently outstanding are as follows: Due within Interest Rate Amount one year General Obligation TOP Bonds, Series 2013 serial maturities through 2034 2.00% - 4.00%6,730,000$ 460,000$ General Obligation TOP Bonds, Series 2014 serial maturities through 2035 2.00% - 4.00%3,700,000 230,000 General Obligation BPSC Bonds, Series 2019 serial maturities through 2039 2.00% - 4.00%30,830,000 1,330,000 General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 2022 serial maturities through 2042 4.00% - 5.00%6,730,000 205,000 Total general obligations bonds 47,990,000$ 2,225,000$ 376 63 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 8. LONG-TERM DEBT (CONTINUED) Governmental Activities Long-Term Debt (Continued) Annual debt service requirements to maturity for general obligation bonds are as follows: Principal Interest Total Year ending June 30, 2023 2,225,000$ 1,729,180$ 3,954,180$ 2024 2,300,000 1,658,650 3,958,650 2025 2,390,000 1,573,675 3,963,675 2025 2,475,000 1,483,125 3,958,125 2026 2,575,000 1,384,250 3,959,250 2028-2032 14,540,000 5,256,200 19,796,200 2033-2037 14,660,000 2,252,519 16,912,519 2038-2042 6,825,000 446,775 7,271,775 47,990,000$ 15,784,374$ 63,774,374$ Tax Increment Financing Bonds - Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Bonds are not general obligations, but are special limited obligations of the City. The bonds are payable solely, and equally and ratably from the tax increment revenues received by the City from its Downtown Bozeman Improvement District. If the incremental revenues are insufficient to pay the principal and interest due on the TIF bonds when due, such payment shortfall shall not constitute a default under the TIF agreement. If and when the incremental revenues are sufficient, the City shall pay the amount of any shortfall to the paying agent and registrar without any penalty interest or premium thereon. Due to the uncertainty of the future tax increment receipts, future payments on the TIF bonds may vary from the summary of debt service requirements. TIF bonds outstanding at June 30, 2022, are as follows: Balance Balance Long-Term June 30, 2021 Issuances Repayments June 30, 2022 Due in One Year Portion Direct placement downtown urban renewal bond, series 2020 3,171,000$ -$ (255,000)$ 2,916,000$ $ 259,000 2,657,000$ Direct placement northeast urban renewal bond, series 2017 1,267,655 - (40,085) 1,227,570 41,803 1,185,767 Midtown urban renewal bond, series 2020 6,325,000 - (180,000) 6,145,000 185,000 5,960,000 10,763,655$ -$ (475,085)$ 10,288,570$ 485,803$ 9,802,767$ 377 64 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 8. LONG-TERM DEBT (CONTINUED) Governmental Activities Long-Term Debt (Continued) Annual debt services requirements to maturity for the TIF bonds are as follows: Principal Interest Total Year ending June 30, 2023 485,803$ 346,298$ 832,101$ 2024 501,468 334,613 836,081 2025 517,401 320,441 837,842 2026 531,215 304,068 835,283 2027 545,171 287,104 832,275 2028-2033 3,010,099 1,163,724 4,173,823 2033-2037 1,780,759 727,391 2,508,150 2038-2042 2,131,654 342,225 2,473,879 2043-2044 785,000 35,550 820,550 10,288,570$ 3,861,414$ 14,149,984$ Special Assessment Debt - Special assessment bonds are payable from the collection of special assessments levied against benefited property owners within each special improvement district. To the extent that such special assessment collections are not sufficient to make the required debt service payments, the City is obligated to levy and collect a general property tax on all taxable property in the City to provide additional funding for the debt service payments. The cash balance in the SID Revolving Fund must equal at least 5% of the principal amount of bonds outstanding. If the cash balance is less than 5%, a levy is required to bring the cash balance to the required minimum. The City has issued various special assessment bonds with various maturities through 2040 at interest rates ranging from 2.5% to 5.75%. In addition, the City has issued two notes payable to finance special assessment projects. The following is a schedule of changes in special assessment debt: Balance Balance June 30, 2021 Issuances Repayments June 30, 2022 Direct borrowings: Note Payable to Department of Natural Resources and Conservation, #WRF-05067 31,000$ -$ (6,000)$ 25,000$ Note Payable to Department of Natural Resources and Conservation, #SRF-05132 76,500 - (28,000) 48,500 Direct placement: Special Improvement District No. 747 Bond Series 2020 3,840,716 - (149,999) 3,690,717 3,948,216$ -$ (183,999)$ 3,764,217$ 378 65 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 8. LONG-TERM DEBT (CONTINUED) Governmental Activities Long-Term Debt (Continued) Annual debt service requirements to maturity for special assessment bonds are as follows: Note Payables Year ending June 30, 2023 189,799$ 2024 198,253 2025 164,866 2026 170,142 2027 175,587 2028-2032 965,904 2033-3037 1,130,672 2038-2040 768,994 3,764,217$ Substantially all special assessment bonds mature 18 to 20 years after the date of issuance but are redeemable at the option of the City whenever cash is available in the respective funds for each issue. The City follows the policy of early redemption on these bonds. Accordingly, a schedule of future interest payments through maturity of the bonds is deemed to be not meaningful and has been excluded. Intercap Loans - The City entered into loan agreements with the Montana Board of Investments to partially finance the reconstruction of South Eighth Avenue, to upgrade street lighting in various areas around the City, and for the Sports Park-Bronken Park improvements. The intercap loans payables had balances outstanding at June 30, 2022, as follows: Due within Due after one year one year Total Direct borrowings: Notes payable to Montana Board of Investments in uneven semi-annual installments including interest at variable rates, ranging from 1.00% to 3.370%: South 8th Reconstruction, matures in 2022 $ 66,161 $ - $ 66,161 Upgrade Street Lighting, matures in 2030 13,796 110,149 123,945 Sports Park-Bronken Park improvement, matures in 2029 29,288 216,238 245,526 109,245$ 326,387$ 435,632$ 379 66 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 8. LONG-TERM DEBT (CONTINUED) Governmental Activities Long-Term Debt (Continued) The debt service requirements for the intercap loan at June 30, 2022, are as follows: Principal Interest Total Year ending June 30, 2023 109,245$ 5,648$ 114,893$ 2024 44,284 - 44,284 2025 45,520 - 45,520 2026 46,797 - 46,797 2027 48,112 - 48,112 2028-2030 141,674 - 141,674 435,632$ 5,648$ 441,280$ Sports Complex Loan - The City entered into a loan agreement with First Security Bank on July 1, 2018 for $1,700,000 for continued improvements to the Bozeman Sports Park, one of the projects identified for funding by the Trail and Open Space General Obligation Bond. The general terms of the loan include a 3.74% interest rate, 20-year term maturing on June 30, 2039, no origination fee, and semi-annual payments of principal and interest of $62,911. The Sports Park Foundation will provide the funding for the payments through their management of the Sports Park and debt agreements with the City. The City’s General Fund will take on this debt and make payments. The revenue generated at the Sports Park Foundation will offset the payment. In the event that the Foundation cannot make the debt payment, the City’s General Fund will cover the payment. Peets Hill Note Payable – The City entered into a loan agreement with Gallatin Valley Land Trust to finance the purchase of real property located in the vicinity of Peets Hill/Burk Park on December 14, 2021. The terms of the note included a two-year term at an interest rate of 3.75%, with principal of $315,000 and accrued interest payable at maturity on January 18, 2024. The City may prepay the principal in whole or in part before the maturity date of January 18, 2024. 380 67 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 8. LONG-TERM DEBT (CONTINUED) Governmental Activities Long-Term Debt (Continued) The outstanding balance and debt service requirements for the sports complex loan at June 30, 2022, are as follows: Due within Due after one year one year Total Direct borrowing: $ 67,627 $ 1,504,323 $ 1,571,950 at maturity in January of 2024 including interest at 3.75%- 315,000 315,000 67,627$ 1,819,323$ 1,886,950$ Note payable to First Security Bank in semi-annual installments including interest at 3.74% through June of 2039 Note payable to Gallatin Valley Land Trust due Principal Interest Total Year ending June 30, 2022 67,627$ 58,168$ 125,795$ 2023 385,104 74,394 459,498 2024 72,902 52,893 125,795 2025 75,579 50,216 125,795 2026 78,432 47,363 125,795 2027-2031 438,824 190,151 628,975 2032-2036 528,235 100,740 628,975 2037-2039 240,247 11,342 251,589 1,886,950$ 585,267$ 2,472,217$ Business-type Activities Long-Term Debt Revenue Bonds - The City also issues bonds where the City pledges income derived from the acquired or constructed assets to pay debt service. 381 68 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 8. LONG-TERM DEBT (CONTINUED) Business-type Activities Long-Term Debt (Continued) Water Revenue Bonds Water revenue bonds outstanding at June 30, 2022, are as follows: Balance Repayments Balance Long-Term June 30, 2021 Issuances and Settlements June 30, 2022 Due in One Year Portion Direct placements: State Revolving Fund Revenue Bond - 12247 Series 2011A, serial maturities through 2032, 3% interest rate $ 6,015,000 $ - $ (496,000) $ 5,519,000 $ 510,000 5,009,000$ State Revolving Fund Revenue Bond - 13291 Series 2011B, serial maturities through 2033, 3% interest rate 6,187,000 - (458,000) 5,729,000 472,000 5,257,000 State Revolving Fund Revenue Bond - 17386 Series 2017, serial maturities through 2037, 2.5% interest rate 6,345,000 - (326,000) 6,019,000 336,000 5,683,000 18,547,000$ -$ (1,280,000)$ 17,267,000$ 1,318,000$ 15,949,000$ The revenue bond ordinances specify that the City shall establish various restricted asset accounts and distribute the net revenues for the water fund to the restricted asset accounts and set user rates at levels which will generate minimum net revenues, as defined. The revenue bond ordinances specify that City management and/or the City Commission shall take corrective actions to bring the City into compliance with the revenue bond ordinances, if necessary, and that bondholders shall have the right to institute proceedings, judicial or otherwise, to enforce the covenants of the revenue bond ordinances. The City is in compliance with applicable covenants as of June 30, 2022. Water revenue bond debt service requirements to maturity are as follows: Principal Interest Total Year ending June 30, 2023 1,318,000$ 338,800$ 1,656,800$ 2024 1,356,000 312,250 1,668,250 2025 1,395,000 284,930 1,679,930 2026 1,435,000 256,840 1,691,840 2027 1,477,000 227,930 1,704,930 2028-2032 7,713,000 675,820 8,388,820 2033-2037 2,573,000 129,740 2,702,740 17,267,000$ 2,226,310$ 19,493,310$ Due within one year $ 1,318,000 Due after one year 15,949,000 17,267,000$ 382 69 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 8. LONG-TERM DEBT (CONTINUED) Business-type Activities Long-Term Debt (Continued) Waste Water Revenue Bonds Waste Water revenue bonds outstanding at June 30, 2022, are as follows: Balance Repayments Balance Long-Term Interest Rate June 30, 2021 Issuances and Settlements June 30, 2022 Due in One Year Portion Direct placements: Waste Water State Revolving -10252 Series 2010B, serial maturities through 2030 1.75% $ 167,000 $ - $ (18,000) $ 149,000 18,000$ 131,000$ Waste Water Reclamation Facility Revenue Bonds - 10230, Series 2010D, serial maturities through 2030 3.00% 4,787,000 - (502,000) 4,285,000 518,000 3,767,000 Waste Water Reclamation Facility Revenue Bonds - 10262, Series 2010F, serial maturities through 2030 3.00% 431,000 - (42,000) 389,000 44,000 345,000 Waste Water Reclamation Facility Revenue Bonds - 11291, Series 2010C, serial maturities through 2031 3.00% 537,000 - (50,000) 487,000 51,000 436,000 Waste Water Reclamation Facility Revenue Bonds - 11292, Series 2010G, serial maturities through 2031 3.00% 1,652,000 - (146,000) 1,506,000 152,000 1,354,000 Waste Water Reclamation Facility Revenue Bonds - 11281 Series 2010H, serial maturities through 2031 3.00% 5,274,000 - (488,000) 4,786,000 502,000 4,284,000 Waste Water State Revolving - 21490 Series 2020D, serial maturities through 2040 2.50% 2,697,000 - (113,000) 2,584,000 115,000 2,469,000 Waste Water State Revolving - 21487 Series 2020B, serial maturities through 2040 2.50% 7,482,000 - (312,000) 7,170,000 320,000 6,850,000 Waste Water State Revolving - 21506 Series 2020C, serial maturities through 2041 2.50% 1,255,587 5,300,734 (280,000) 6,276,321 273,321 6,003,000 Waste Water State Revolving - 21486 Series 2020A Davis/Norton General Obligation Bonds, Forgivable 2.50%300,000 - - 300,000 - 300,000 24,582,587$ 5,300,734$ (1,951,000)$ 27,932,321$ 1,993,321$ 25,939,000$ 383 70 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 8. LONG-TERM DEBT (CONTINUED) Business-type Activities Long-Term Debt (Continued) Waste Water Revenue Bonds (Continued) Waste water revenue bond debt service requirements to maturity are as follows: Principal Interest Total Year ending June 30, 2023 1,993,321$ 573,433$ 2,566,754$ 2024 2,051,000 531,968 2,582,968 2025 2,111,000 489,298 2,600,298 2026 2,171,000 445,388 2,616,388 2027 2,234,000 400,265 2,634,265 2028-2032 8,956,000 1,326,271 10,282,271 2033-2037 4,754,000 663,438 5,417,438 2038-2041 3,662,000 140,585 3,802,585 27,932,321$ 4,570,646$ 32,502,967$ Due within one year $ 1,993,321 Due after one year 25,939,000 27,932,321$ Stormwater Revenue Bonds Stormwater revenue bonds outstanding at June 30, 2022, are as follows. The City had draws of $229,750 in fiscal year 2015, $1,281,680 in fiscal year 2016, and $303,750 in fiscal year 2019 for a total approved amount of $1,815,000. Balance Repayments Balance Long-Term Interest Rate June 30, 2021 Issuances and Settlements June 30, 2022 Due in One Year Portion Direct placement: Stormwater System Revenue Bond, Series 2015 2.50% 1,362,000$ $ - $ (82,000) $ 1,280,000 84,000 1,196,000$ 384 71 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 8. LONG-TERM DEBT (CONTINUED) Business-type Activities Long-Term Debt (Continued) Stormwater Revenue Bonds (Continued) Stormwater revenue bond debt service requirements to maturity are as follows: Principal Interest Total Year ending June 30, 2023 84,000$ 25,180$ 109,180$ 2024 87,000 23,490 110,490 2025 89,000 21,740 110,740 2026 90,000 19,950 109,950 2027 94,000 18,130 112,130 2028-2032 502,000 61,550 563,550 2033-2035 334,000 11,780 345,780 1,280,000$ 181,820$ 1,461,820$ Due within one year $ 84,000 Due after one year 1,196,000 1,280,000$ Industrial Revenue and Private Activity Bonds The City issues tax exempt industrial revenue and private activity bonds to finance construction of facilities within the City, which it sells on installment contracts to the facilities' users. The bonds and the interest payable thereon are not obligations of the City and do not constitute or give rise to a pecuniary liability or contingent liability of the City or a charge against the general credit or taxing power of the City. The bonds are issued under and collateralized by the indentures and are payable solely from the payments to be made pursuant to the loan agreements between the City and the facilities users. The bonds are not a lien on any of the City’s properties or revenues, other than the facilities for which they were issued. To provide financial assistance for the acquisition and improvements of the building occupied by a private elementary school, the City has issued a Private Activity Revenue Bond. This bond is secured by the property financed and is payable solely from payments received on the underlying mortgage loan. Upon repayment of the bond, ownership of the acquired facility transfers to the private-sector entity served by the bond issuance. Neither the City nor any political subdivision thereof is obligated in any manner for repayment of the bond. Accordingly, the bond is not reported as a liability in the accompanying financial statements. As of June 30, 2022, the Revenue Bond outstanding had an aggregate principal amount payable of $140,129. 385 72 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 9. LEASES As discussed in Note 1, the City implemented GASB Statement No. 87, Leases for the year ended June 30, 2022. The City had various pre-existing capital leases that were either paid off during the year ended June 30, 2022 or are set to expire in fiscal year 2023 or 2024. The total amount of the existing lease obligations and carrying value of the capitalized assets are immaterial and the difference in accounting for these existing leases under GASB Statement No. 87, Leases was also deemed immaterial to the financial statements. All the leases listed below, except for the Highlander Library and the E. Beall Office leases, were existing capital leases at the beginning of the year. Lease agreements are summarized as follows: Lease Origination Date Interest Rate Lease Term Maturity Date Payment Amount Balloon Payment Snow Blower 2016 9/9/2016 3.20%6 years 3/16/2023 13,933$ 6,342$ Canon Printer 2018 1/1/2018 5.56%5 years 12/1/2022 1,257 - Caterpillar Motor Grader 2018 4/25/2018 4.55%6 years 4/25/2023 - 127,840 Elgin Broom Street Sweeper 2019 4/29/2019 4.35%6 years 4/29/2024 82,776 - Highlander Library 2019 9/19/2018 7.04%3 years 9/18/2021 - - Prius Recreation 2020 1/27/2020 N/A; fixed monthly amount 3 years 1/26/2023 391 - Prius Sustainability 2019 9/21/2018 N/A; fixed monthly amount 5 years 9/20/2021 430 - Prius Streets/Water 2019 9/9/2018 7.04%5 years 9/9/2023 301 - Prius Engineering 1 2019 9/9/2018 7.04%5 years 9/9/2023 301 - Prius Engineering 2 2019 9/9/2018 7.04%5 years 9/9/2023 346 - Prius Water Conservation 2019 9/9/2018 7.04%5 years 9/9/2023 306 - Highlander Library 2022 11/11/2021 5.00%3 years 10/1/2024 594 - E. Beall Office Lease 2022 4/1/2022 5.00%5 years 3/1/2027 7,399 - Lease Paid off in FY22 Bargain Purchase Option or Lease Purchase Contract Exists? Installment sale contract Exists? Snow Blower 2016 No Yes No Canon Printer 2018 No Yes No Caterpillar Motor Grader 2018 No Yes No Elgin Broom Street Sweeper 2019 No Yes No Highlander Library 2019 Yes Yes No Prius Recreation 2020 No Yes No Prius Sustainability 2019 Yes Yes No Prius Streets/Water 2019 Yes No Yes Prius Engineering 1 2019 Yes No Yes Prius Engineering 2 2019 Yes No Yes Prius Water Conservation 2019 Yes No Yes Highlander Library 2022 No Yes No E. Beall Office Lease 2022 No No No Bargain Purchase Option Exercised? City Plans to Exercise Lease Purchase Contract? Yes Yes Installment Sale Contract Paid Off; Title Transferred? Yes Yes No Yes Yes N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Unknown Yes Yes Yes N/A N/A N/A Unknown N/A N/A N/A N/A 386 73 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 9. LEASES (CONTINUED) The lease liability balance outstanding at June 30, 2022, is as follows: Balance Balance Long-Term June 30, 2021 Issuances Repayments June 30, 2022 Due in One Year Portion Governmental Activities: Snow Blower 2016 $ 19,736 $ - $ (13,302) $ 6,434 $ 6,434 $ - Caterpillar Motor Grader 2018 146,628 - (24,352) 122,276 122,276 - Canon Printer 2018 2,683 - (1,759) 924 924 - Elgin Broom Sweeper 2019 113,907 - (36,333) 77,574 37,945 39,629 Highlander Library 2019 972 - (972) - - - Prius Sustainability 2019 1,292 - (1,292) - - - Prius Streets 2019 3,490 - (3,490) - - - Prius Engineering 1 2019 6,984 - (6,984) - - - Prius Engineering 2 2019 8,022 - (8,022) - - - Prius Recreation 2020 6,556 - (4,141) 2,415 2,415 - Highlander Library 2022 - 19,833 (4,684) 15,149 5,968 9,181 East Beall Office Lease 2022 - 423,122 (16,980) 406,142 70,968 335,174 $ 310,270 $ 442,955 $ (122,311) $ 630,914 $ 246,930 $ 383,984 Business-Type Activities: Prius Water 2019 3,493 - (3,493) - - - Prius Water Conservation 2019 7,092 - (7,092) - - - $ 10,585 $ - $ (10,585) $ - $ - $ - Principal and interest requirements to maturity of the leases as of June 30, 2022 are as follows: Governmental Activities Principal Interest Year ending June 30, 2023 $ 246,930 $ 28,665 2024 124,732 17,033 2025 88,461 10,922 2026 94,477 6,413 2027 76,314 1,600 Total 630,914$ 64,633$ 387 74 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 9. LEASES (CONTINUED) The below table details amortization by class and total interest on lease liabilities for the year ended June 30, 2022: Governmental Activities Lease expense Amortization expense by class of underlying asset Leased equipment $ 58,754 Leased building 42,312 Leased vehicles 4,586 Total amortization expense 105,652 Interest on lease liabilities 64,633 Total $ 170,285 Year ending June 30, 2022 The total amount of right-of-use leased assets by class and related accumulated amortization at June 30, 2022 is as follows: Governmental Activities Intangible right-of-use leased assets, net Leased equipment $ 558,809 Less accumulated amortization on leased equipment (252,411) Leased equipment, net 306,398 Leased building 423,122 Less accumulated amortization on leased building (42,312) Leased building, net 380,810 Leased vehicles 32,646 Less accumulated amortization on leased vehicles (6,508) Leased vehicles, net 26,138 Total intangible right-of-use leased assets, net 713,346$ June 30, 2022 388 75 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 9. LEASES (CONTINUED) On October 22, 1992, the City signed a memorandum of understanding with Gallatin County, Montana, in which the City agreed to lease space from the County's Law and Justice Center for the City Police Department and Municipal Court. The City paid to the County $765,000 during the renovation of the building, which started 1993. The $765,000 constitutes rent for four rental terms of ten years each. During the term of the lease and renewal of the lease, the principal balance of $765,000 will be decreased by equal annual rental payments in the amount of $19,125. If the City and County mutually agree to terminate the lease after the second ten-year term, the County will refund $274,125, to the City for the unused portion of the rent. The lease began when renovations were complete on November 1, 1994. For the year ended June 30, 2022, rent expenditure was $19,125 regarding this lease. Subsequent to fiscal year-end, the lease was terminated by both parties upon the opening of the Bozeman Public Safety Center. The County paid $210,7135 to the City in October 2022 for the unused portion of the rent. Due to the expected termination of the lease, the City deemed the lease arrangement immaterial to the financial statements for the year ended June 30, 2022. NOTE 10. CLASSIFICATION OF NET POSITION In the Government-Wide Financial Statements, net position is classified in the following categories: Net Investment in Capital Assets – This category groups all capital assets, including infrastructure in future years, into one component of net position. Accumulated depreciation and the outstanding balances of debt that are attributable to the acquisition, construction, or improvement of these assets reduce this category. Restricted Net Position – This category represents external restrictions imposed by creditors, grantors, contributors, or laws or regulations of other governments, and restrictions imposed by law through constitutional provision or enabling legislation. Net Position is presented as restricted by major purpose. Unrestricted Net Position – This category represents the net position of the City that are not restricted for any project or other purpose. In the Fund Financial Statements, commitments and assignments segregate portions of fund balance that are either not available or have been earmarked for specific purposes. The various commitments and assignments are established by actions of the City Commission and Management and can be increased, reduced, or eliminated by similar actions. Refer to Note 12 for a further disclosure related to fund balance classifications. 389 76 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 10. CLASSIFICATION OF NET POSITION (CONTINUED) The City’s calculation of net investment in capital assets is as follows: Governmental Activities Business-type Activities Net capital assets 275,835,087$ 329,667,072$ Less: capital related debt (64,707,314) (46,479,316) Plus: capital debt reserve balance - 3,274,157 Plus: unspent capital related debt proceeds 9,464,190 - Less: capital related retainage and accounts payables (3,350,273) - Net investment in capital assets 217,241,690$ 286,461,913$ NOTE 11. RESTRICTED NET POSITION At June 30, 2022, the balances of restricted net position for business-type activities are as follows: Waste Water Nonmajor Water Fund Fund Enterprise Total Restricted by revenue bond covenants: For bond reserve 898,774$ 2,317,095$ 58,288$ 3,274,157$ Restricted by ordinance: Cash in lieu of parking - - 130,316 130,316 Cash in lieu of infrastructure 516,859 - - 516,859 Impact fees 15,432,602 9,984,007 - 25,416,609 16,848,235$ 12,301,102$ 188,604$ 29,337,941$ Business-Type Activities 390 77 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 12. FUND BALANCE COMPOSITION The table presented below displays the City’s fund balances by major purpose as displayed on page 33 of the governmental funds balance sheet. American Nonmajor Total General Rescue Plan Street Impact SID Construction Governmental Governmental Fund Act Fee Fund Debt Service Capital Projects Funds Funds Nonspendable Prepaids -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 235,875$ 235,875$ Cemetery perpetual care - - - - - 1,684,104 1,684,104 Total nonspendable - - - - - 1,919,979 1,919,979 Restricted General government-Planning - - - - - 743,027 743,027 General government-Health Insurance - - - - - 1,025,294 1,025,294 General government-other - - - - - 105 105 Public safety - Building Inspection - - - - - 1,409,716 1,409,716 Public safety-Fire Impact - - - - - 4,287,167 4,287,167 Public safety-Victim Witness - - - - - 401,187 401,187 Public safety-other - - 13,218,872 - - - 13,218,872 Public service - - - - - 5,816,737 5,816,737 Public service - Gas Tax - - - - - 1,062,125 1,062,125 Public service - Community Transportation - - - - - - - Public service - Lighting Districts - - - - - 498,391 498,391 Public welfare - Tax Increment Districts - - - - - 6,849,540 6,849,540 Public welfare - Econ Develop Loan Fund - - - - - 1,025,026 1,025,026 Public welfare - Tree Maint. District - - - - - 660,347 660,347 Public welfare - other - - - - - 3,342,286 3,342,286 Capital projects - - - - 9,328,155 - 9,328,155 Debt service - TIF Bonds - - - - - - - Debt service - SID Sinking - - - 4,403,242 - - 4,403,242 Debt service - SID Revolving Fund - - - - - 1,463,281 1,463,281 Debt service - GO Bonds - - - - - 48,031 48,031 Total restricted - - 13,218,872 4,403,242 9,328,155 28,632,260 55,582,529 391 78 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 12. FUND BALANCE COMPOSITION (CONTINUED) American Nonmajor Total General Rescue Plan SID SID Construction Governmental Governmental Fund Act Debt Service Debt Service Capital Projects Funds Funds Committed Public safety - - - - - 1,042,272 1,042,272 Public welfare - - - - - 2,126,655 2,126,655 Capital projects - - - - - - - Total committed - - - - - 3,168,927 3,168,927 Assigned General government 959,858 - - - - - 959,858 Public welfare - - - - - 134,135 134,135 Capital projects 1,682,947 - - - - - 1,682,947 Budget ordinance minimum 16.67%6,065,890 - - - - - 6,065,890 Total assigned 8,708,695 - - - - 134,135 8,842,830 Unassigned (107,076) (197,922) - - - (114,258) (419,256) Total fund balance 8,601,619$ (197,922)$ 13,218,872$ 4,403,242$ 9,328,155$ 33,741,043$ 69,095,009$ NOTE 13. DEFICIT FUND BALANCES At June 30, 2022, the following funds had deficit fund balances: American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) fund ($197,122), TIF Bonds fund ($1,499) and the Vehicle Maintenance Shop fund ($478,000). The deficit fund balance in the ARPA fund is due to the fair market value adjustment of $206,290 decreasing the value of cash and investments held in the ARPA fund as of June 30, 2022. The decrease in the fair market value of investments as of June 30,2022 was due to increasing interest rates. As the City's current fixed income investments mature and are replaced by investments with higher interest rates the effects on fair market value should lessen. The deficit fund balance in Vehicle Maintenance Shop fund is due to an increase in the materials and supplies and salaries and benefits expenses. The City will re-evaluate the internal allocations to keep pace with increasing costs as well as recover the fund balance deficit that has accumulated over the last two fiscal years. 392 79 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 14. DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN The City offers its employees a defined contribution, deferred compensation plan created in accordance with Internal Revenue Code Section 457. The plan, available to all City employees, permits them to defer a portion of their salary until future years. The deferred compensation is not available to employees until termination, retirement, death, or unforeseeable emergency. The City does not contribute to the plan, and it does not report any balances related to the deferred compensation plan, as these amounts represent neither assets nor liabilities to the City, and the plan is administered by an independent third party, ICMA Retirement Corporation. NOTE 15. EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLANS Plan Description and Provisions All City of Bozeman full-time employees participate in one of three statewide, cost-sharing, multiple-employer, retirement benefit plans administered by the Public Employees Retirement Division (PERD). Contributions to the three plans are as required by State statute. Fiscal years 2022 and 2021 total payroll and covered payroll for all retirement plans were $25,726,854 and $24,322,441, respectively. Financial information for all three plans is reported in the Public Employees' Retirement Board's published Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the fiscal year-end. It is available from the PERD at 100 North Park Avenue, Suite 220, P.O. Box 200131, Helena, MT 59620-0131. The authority to establish, amend, and provide cost of living adjustments to all three plans is assigned to the State legislature. The authority to establish and amend contribution rates to all three plans is also assigned to the State legislature. Aggregate Pension Totals The following table aggregates the amounts for all pension plans in which the City participates. PERS FURS MPORS Total Pension deferred outflows of resources 3,832,772$ 1,856,591$ 1,997,666$ 7,687,029$ Net pension liability 15,249,847 1,935,764 5,327,439 22,513,050 Pension deferred inflows of resources 6,521,011 1,378,320 1,666,696 9,566,027 Pension expense 1,882,533 1,195,878 2,524,218 5,602,629 Public Employees' Retirement System (PERS) In accordance with GASB Statement 68, Accounting and Financial Reporting for Pensions, employers and the non-employer contributing entity are required to recognize and report certain amounts associated with participation in the Public Employees’ Retirement System Defined Benefit Retirement Plan (the Plan). This includes the proportionate share of the collective Net Pension Liability; Pension Expense; and Deferred Outflows and Deferred Inflows of Resources associated with pensions. Employers are provided guidance in GASB Statement 68, paragraph 74, where pension amounts must be combined as a total or aggregate for reporting, whether provided through cost-sharing, single-employer, or agent plans. These disclosures provide information for employers who are using a June 30, 2021 measurement date for the 2022 reporting. 393 80 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 15. EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLANS (CONTINUED) Public Employees' Retirement System (PERS) (Continued) Summary of Significant Accounting Policies The Montana Public Employee Retirement Administration (MPERA) prepares its financial statements using the accrual basis of accounting. The same accrual basis was used by MPERA for the purposes of determining the Net Pension Liability (NPL); Deferred Outflows of Resources and Deferred Inflows of Resources related to pensions; Pension Expense; the Fiduciary Net Position; and, Additions to or Deductions from Fiduciary Net Position. Member contributions are recognized in the period in which contributions are due. Employer contributions are recognized when due and the employer has made a formal commitment to provide the contributions. Revenues are recognized in the accounting period they are earned and become measurable. Benefit payments and refunds are recognized in the accounting period in which they are due and payable in accordance with the benefit terms. Expenses are recognized in the period incurred. Investments are reported at fair value. MPERA adhered to all accounting principles generally accepted by the United States of America. MPERA applied all applicable pronouncements of the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB). General Information about the Pension Plan Plan Description The PERS-Defined Benefit Retirement Plan (DBRP), administered by the Montana Public Employee Retirement Administration (MPERA), is a multiple-employer, cost-sharing plan established July 1, 1945, and governed by Title 19, chapters 2 & 3, Montana Code Annotated (MCA). This plan provides retirement benefits to covered employees of the State, and local governments, and certain employees of the Montana University System, and school districts. Benefits are established by state law and can only be amended by the Legislature. All new members are initially members of the PERS-DBRP and have a 12-month window during which they may choose to remain in the PERS-DBRP or join the PERS-DCRP by filing an irrevocable election. Members may not be participants of both the defined benefit and defined contribution retirement plans. All new members from the universities also have a third option to join the university system’s Montana University System Retirement Program (MUS-RP). Benefits Provided The PERS-DBRP provides retirement, disability, and death benefits to plan members and their beneficiaries. Benefits are based on eligibility, years of service, and highest average compensation (HAC). Member rights are vested after five years of service. Service Retirement Hired prior to July 1, 2011: Age 60, 5 years of membership service; Age 65, regardless of membership service; or Any age, 30 years of membership service. Hired on or after July 1, 2011: Age 65, 5 years of membership services; Age 70, regardless of membership service. 394 81 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 15. EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLANS (CONTINUED) Public Employees' Retirement System (PERS) (Continued) Benefits Provided (Continued) Early Retirement Early retirement, actuarially reduced: Hired prior to July 1, 2011: Age 50, 5 years of membership service; or Any age, 25 years of membership service. Hired on or after July 1, 2011: Age 55, 5 years of membership service. Second Retirement (requires returning to PERS-covered employer or PERS service): 1. Retire before January 1, 2016 and accumulate less than 2 years additional service credit or retire on or after January 1, 2016 and accumulate less than 5 years additional service credit: a) A refund of member’s contributions plus return interest (currently 2.02% effective July 1, 2018); b) No service credit for second employment; c) Start the same benefit amount the month following termination; and d) Guaranteed Annual Benefit Adjustment (GABA) starts again in the January immediately following the second retirement. 2. Retire before January 1, 2016 and accumulate at least 2 years of additional service credit; a) A recalculated retirement benefit based on provisions in effect after the initial retirement; and b) GABA starts on the recalculated benefit in the January after receiving the new benefit for 12 months. 3. Retire on or after January 1, 2016 and accumulate 5 or more years of service credit; c) The same retirement as prior to the return to service; d) A second retirement benefit as prior to the second of service based on laws in effect upon the rehire date; and e) GABA starts on both benefits in January after receiving the original and new benefit for 12 months. Member’s Highest Average Compensation (HAC) Hired prior to July 1, 2011 – highest average compensation during any consecutive 36 months; Hired on or after July 1, 2011 – highest average compensation during any consecutive 60 months; Compensation Cap Hired on or after July 1, 2013 – 110% annual cap on compensation considered as a part of member’s highest average compensation. 395 82 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 15. EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLANS (CONTINUED) Public Employees' Retirement System (PERS) (Continued) Benefits Provided (Continued) Monthly Benefit Formula Members hired prior to July 1, 2011: • Less than 25 years of membership service: 1.785% of HAC per year of service credit; • 25 years of membership service or more: 2% of HAC per year of service credit. Members hired on or after July 1, 2011: • Less than 10 years of membership service: 1.5% of HAC per year of service credit; • 10 years or more, but less than 30 years of membership service: 1.785% of HAC per year of service credit; • 30 years or more of membership service: 2% of HAC per year of service credit. Guaranteed Annual Benefit Adjustment (GABA)* After the member has completed 12 full months of retirement, the member's benefit increases by the applicable percentage (provided below) each January, inclusive of other adjustments to the member's benefit. • 3% for members hired prior to July 1, 2007 • 1.5% for members hired between July 1, 2007 and June 30, 2013 • Members hired on or after July 1, 2013: (a) 1.5% for each year PERS is funded at or above 90%; (b) 1.5% is reduced by 0.1% for each 2% PERS is funded below 90%; and (c) 0% whenever the amortization period for PERS is 40 years or more. Overview of Contributions The state Legislature has the authority to establish and amend contribution rates. Member and employer contribution rates are specified by Montana Statute and are a percentage of the member’s compensation. Contributions are deducted from each member’s salary and remitted by participating employers. Special Funding: The State of Montana, as the non-employer contributing entity, paid to the Plan, additional contributions that qualify as special funding. Those employers who received special funding are all participating employers. Not Special Funding: Per Montana law, state agencies and universities paid their own additional contributions. The employer paid contributions are not accounted for as special funding for state agencies and universities but are reported as employer contributions. 396 83 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 15. EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLANS (CONTINUED) Public Employees' Retirement System (PERS) (Continued) Overview of Contributions (Continued) State & Universities Fiscal Year Hired <07/01/11 Hired >07/01/11 Employer Employer State Employer State 2022 7.900% 7.900% 8.970% 8.870% 0.100% 8.600% 0.370% 2021 7.900% 7.900% 8.870% 8.770% 0.100% 8.500% 0.370% 2020 7.900% 7.900% 8.770% 8.670% 0.100% 8.400% 0.370% 2019 7.900% 7.900% 8.670% 8.570% 0.100% 8.300% 0.370% 2018 7.900% 7.900% 8.570% 8.470% 0.100% 8.200% 0.370% 2017 7.900% 7.900% 8.470% 8.370% 0.100% 8.100% 0.370% 2016 7.900% 7.900% 8.370% 8.270% 0.100% 8.000% 0.370% 2015 7.900% 7.900% 8.270% 8.170% 0.100% 7.900% 0.370% 2014 7.900% 7.900% 8.170% 8.070% 0.100% 7.800% 0.370% 2012-2013 6.900% 7.900% 7.170% 7.070% 0.100% 6.800% 0.370% 2010-2011 6.900%7.170% 7.070% 0.100% 6.800% 0.370% 2008-2009 6.900%7.035% 6.935% 0.100% 6.800% 0.235% 2000-2007 6.900%6.900% 6.800% 0.100% 6.800% 0.100% Member School DistrictsLocal Government 1. Member contributions to the system of 7.9% of member’s compensation are temporary and will be decreased to 6.9% on January 1 following actuary valuation results that show the amortization period has dropped below 25 years and would remain below 25 years following the reduction of both the additional employer and additional member contribution rates. 2. Employer contributions to the system: a. Effective July 1, 2014, following the 2013 Legislative Session, PERS-employer contributions increase an additional 0.1% a year and will continue over 10 years through 2024. The additional employer contributions including the 0.27% added in 2007 and 2009, will terminate on January 1 following an actuary valuation that shows the amortization period of the PERS-DBRP has dropped below 25 years and remains below the 25 years following the reduction of both the additional employer and member contributions rates. b. Effective July 1, 2013, employers are required to make contributions on working retirees’ compensation. Member contributions for working retirees are not required. c. The portion of employer contributions allocated to the PCR are included in the employers reporting. The PCR was paid off effective March 2016 and the contributions previously directed to the PCR are now directed to member accounts. 397 84 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 15. EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLANS (CONTINUED) Public Employees' Retirement System (PERS) (Continued) Overview of Contributions (Continued) 3. Non Employer Contributions a. Special Funding i. The State contributes 0.1% of members’ compensation on behalf of local government entities. ii. The State contributes 0.37% of members’ compensation on behalf of school district entities. iii. The state contributed a Statutory Appropriation from the General Fund of $34,290,660. Actuarial Assumptions The total pension liability (TPL) as of June 30, 2021, measurement date, was determined on the results of an actuarial valuation date of June 30, 2020, using the following actuarial assumptions, applied to all periods included in the measurement. Among those assumptions were the following: • Investment Return (net of admin expense) 7.06% • Admin expense as a % of payroll 0.28% • General Wage Growth* 3.50% *includes Inflation at 2.40% • Merit Increases 0% to 4.80% • Postretirement Benefit Increases Guaranteed Annual Benefit Adjustment (GABA) each January. After the member has completed 12 full months of retirement, the member’s benefit increases by the applicable percentage (provided below) each January, inclusive of other adjustments to the member’s benefit. ° 3% for members hired prior to July 1, 2007 ° 1.5% for members hired between July 1, 2007 and June 30, 2013 ° Members hired on or after July 1, 2013: a) 1.5% for each year PERS is funded at or above 90%; b) 1.5% is reduced by 0.1% for each 2% PERS is funded below 90%; and c) 0% whenever the amortization period for PERS is 40 years or more. • Mortality assumptions among contributing members, service retired members and beneficiaries are based on RP-2000 Combined Employee and Annuitant Mortality Tables projected to 2020 with scale BB, males set back one year. • Mortality assumptions among disabled members are based on RP-2000 Mortality Tables with no projections. 398 85 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 15. EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLANS (CONTINUED) Public Employees' Retirement System (PERS) (Continued) Discount Rate The discount rate used to measure the TPL was 7.06%. The projection of cash flows used to determine the discount rate assumed that contributions from participating plan members, employers, and non-employer contributing entities would be made based on the Board’s funding policy, which established the contractually required rates under the Montana Code Annotated. The state contributed 0.10% of the salaries paid by local governments and 0.37% paid by school districts. In addition, the state contributed a statutory appropriation from the general fund. Based on those assumptions, the Plan’s fiduciary net position was projected to be adequate to make all the projected future benefit payments of current plan members through the year 2126. Therefore, the long-term expected rate of return on pension plan investments was applied to all periods of projected benefit payments to determine the TPL. A municipal bond rate was not incorporated in the discount rate. Target Allocations The long-term rate of return as of June 30, 2021, the measurement date, was calculated using the average long-term capital market assumptions published in the Survey of Capital Market Assumptions 2021 Edition by Horizon Actuarial Service, LLC, yielding a median real return of 4.66%. The assumed inflation is based on the intermediate inflation assumption of 2.40% in the 2021 OASDI Trustees Report used by the Chief Actuary for Social Security to produce 75-year cost projections. Combining these two results yields a nominal return of 7.06%. Best estimates of arithmetic real rates of return for each major asset class included in the target asset allocation as of June 30, 2021, the measurement date, are summarized in the table below: Long-Term Expected Target Asset Real Rate of Return Asset Class Allocation Arithmetic Basis Cash 3.00%-0.33% Domestic Equity 30.00%5.90% International Equity 17.00%7.14% Private Investments 15.00%9.13% Real Assets 5.00%4.03% Real Estate 9.00%5.41% Core Fixed Income 15.00%1.14% Non-Core Fixed Income 6.00%3.02% Total 100.00% 399 86 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 15. EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLANS (CONTINUED) Public Employees' Retirement System (PERS) (Continued) Sensitivity of the Proportionate Share of the Net Pension Liability to Changes in the Discount Rate The following presents the employer’s sensitivity of the NPL to the discount rate in the table below. A small change in the discount rate can create a significant change in the liability. The NPL was calculated using the discount rate of 7.06%, as well as what the NPL would be if it were calculated using a discount rate 1.00% lower or 1.00% higher than the current rate. As of 1.0% Decrease Current Discount 1.0% Increase Measurement Date at 6.06%Rate at 8.06% City of Bozeman Net Pension Liability $24,206,755 $15,249,847 $7,737,081 Pension Liabilities, Pension Expense, and Deferred Outflows of Resources and Deferred Inflows of Resources Related to Pensions GASB Statement 68 allows a measurement date of up to 12 months before the employer’s fiscal year-end can be utilized to determine the Plan’s TPL. The basis for the TPL as of June 30, 2021, was determined by taking the results of the June 30, 2020, actuarial valuation and applying standard roll forward procedures. The roll forward procedure uses a calculation that adds the annual normal cost (also called the service cost), subtracts the actual benefit payments and refunds for the plan year, and then applies the expected investment rate of return for the year. The roll forward procedure will include the effects of any assumption changes and legislative changes. The update procedures are in conformity with Actuarial Standards of Practice issued by the Actuarial Standards Board. The Total Pension Liability (TPL) minus the Fiduciary Net Position equals the Net Pension Liability (NPL). The proportionate shares of the employer’s and the state of Montana’s NPL for June 30, 2022, and 2021 (reporting dates), are displayed below. The employer’s proportionate share equals the ratio of the employer’s contributions to the sum of all employer and non-employer contributions during the measurement period. The state’s proportionate share for a particular employer equals the ratio of the contributions for the particular employer to the total state contributions paid. The employer recorded a liability of $15,249,847 and the employer’s proportionate share was 0.841036 percent. As of Reporting Date Net Pension Liability as of 6/30/22 Net Pension Liability as of 6/30/21 Percent of Collective NPL as of 6/30/22 Percent of Collective NPL as of 6/30/21 Change in Percent of Collective NPL City of Bozeman Proportionate Share $ 15,249,847 $ 22,483,506 0.8410%0.8522%-0.0112% State of Montana Proportionate Share associated with the City 4,507,680 7,096,303 0.2486%0.2690%-0.0204% Total 19,757,527$ 29,579,809$ 1.0896%1.1212%-0.0316% Changes in Actuarial Assumptions and Methods: The following changes in assumptions or other inputs were made that affected the measurement of the TPL: 1. The discount rate was lowered from 7.34% to 7.06% 2. The investment rate of return was lowered from 7.34% to 7.06% 400 87 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 15. EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLANS (CONTINUED) Public Employees' Retirement System (PERS) (Continued) Pension Liabilities, Pension Expense, and Deferred Outflows of Resources and Deferred Inflows of Resources Related to Pensions (Continued) Changes in Benefit Terms: There have been no changes in benefit terms since the previous measurement date. Changes in Proportionate Share: There were no changes between the measurement date of the collective NPL and the employer’s reporting date that are expected to have a significant effect on the employer’s proportionate share of the collective NPL. Pension Expense At June 30, 2022, the reporting date, the employer recognized $587,584 for its proportionate share of the Plan’s pension expense. The employer also recognized grant revenue of $1,294,949 for the support provided by the State of Montana for its proportionate share of the pension expense associated with the employer. As of reporting date Pension Expense as of 6/30/22 Pension Expense as of 6/30/21 City’s Proportionate Share 587,584$ 3,000,057$ Employer Grant Revenue - State of Montana Proportionate Share for Employer 1,294,949 1,160,544 Total 1,882,533$ 4,160,601$ Recognition of Deferred Inflows and Outflows At June 30, 2022, the reporting date, the employer reported its proportionate share of PERS’ deferred outflows of resources and deferred inflows of resources related to PERS from the following sources: As of Reporting Date Deferred Outflows of Resources Deferred Inflows of Resources Expected v. actual experience 162,744$ 110,393$ Projected investment earnings v. actual investment earnings - 6,177,871 Changes in assumptions 2,258,786 - Changes in proportion and differences between employer contributions and proportionate share of contributions - 232,747 Employer contributions subsequent to the measurement date 1,411,242 - Total 3,832,772$ 6,521,011$ 401 88 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 15. EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLANS (CONTINUED) Public Employees' Retirement System (PERS) (Continued) Pension Liabilities, Pension Expense, and Deferred Outflows of Resources and Deferred Inflows of Resources Related to Pensions (Continued) Recognition of Deferred Inflows and Outflows (Continued) Other amounts reported as deferred outflows and inflows of resources related to pensions will be recognized in the employer’s pension expense as follows: For the Reporting Year ended June 30: Recognition of deferred outflows and deferred inflows in future years as an increase or (decrease) to pension expense 2023 (76,819)$ 2024 (558,417)$ 2025 (1,492,114)$ 2026 (1,972,129)$ 2027 -$ Thereafter -$ PERS Disclosure for the Defined Contribution Plan The City contributed to the state of Montana Public Employee Retirement System Defined Contribution Retirement Plan (PERS-DCRP) for employees that have elected the DCRP. The PERS-DCRP is administered by the PERB and is reported as a multiple employer plan established July 1, 2002, and governed by Title 19, chapters 2 & 3, MCA. All new PERS members are initially members of the PERS-DBRP and have a 12-month window during which they may choose to remain in the PERS-DBRP or join the PERS-DCRP by filing an irrevocable election. Members may not be participants of both the defined benefit and defined contribution retirement plans. Member and employer contribution rates are specified by state law and are a percentage of the member’s compensation. Contributions are deducted from each member’s salary and remitted by participating employers. The state Legislature has the authority to establish and amend contribution rates. Benefits are dependent upon eligibility and individual account balances. Participants are vested immediately in their own contributions and attributable income. Participants are vested after 5 years of membership service for the employer’s contributions to individual accounts and the attributable income. Non-vested contributions are forfeited upon termination of employment per 19-3-2117(5), MCA. Such forfeitures are used to cover the administrative expenses of the PERS-DCRP. 402 89 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 15. EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLANS (CONTINUED) Public Employees' Retirement System (PERS) (Continued) PERS Disclosure for the Defined Contribution Plan (Continued) At the plan level for the reporting period ended June 30, 2022, the PERS-DCRP employer did not recognize any net pension liability or pension expense for the defined contribution plan. Plan level non-vested forfeitures for the 329 employers that have participants in the PERS-DCRP totaled $1,103,889. Pension plan fiduciary net position: The stand-alone financial statements of the Montana Public Employees Retirement Board (PERB) Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) and the GASB 68 Report disclose the Plan’s fiduciary net position. The reports are available from the PERB at PO Box 200131, Helena, MT 59620-0131, (406) 444-3154 or both are available on the MPERA website at https://mpera.mt.gov/about/annualreports1/annualreports. Firefighters’ Unified Retirement System (FURS) In accordance with GASB Statement 68, Accounting and Financial Reporting for Pensions, employers and the non-employer contributing entity are required to recognize and report certain amounts associated with participation in the Firefighters’ Unified Retirement System (the Plan). This includes the proportionate share of the collective Net Pension Liability; Pension Expense; and Deferred Outflows and Deferred Inflows of Resources associated with pensions. Employers are provided guidance in GASB Statement 68, paragraph 74, where pension amounts must be combined as a total or aggregate for reporting, whether provided through cost-sharing, single-employer, or agent pension plans. These disclosures provide information for employers who are using a June 30, 2021 measurement date for the 2022 reporting. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies MPERA prepared financial statements using the accrual basis of accounting. The same accrual basis was used by MPERA for the purposes of determining the Net Pension Liability (NPL); Deferred Outflows of Resources and Deferred Inflows of Resources related to pensions; Pension Expense; the Fiduciary Net Position; and, Additions to or Deductions from Fiduciary Net Position. Member contributions are recognized in the period in which contributions are due. Employer contributions are recognized when due and the employer has made a formal commitment to provide the contributions. Revenues are recognized in the accounting period they are earned and become measurable. Benefit payments and refunds are recognized in the accounting period in which they are due and payable in accordance with the benefit terms. Expenses are recognized in the period incurred. Investments are reported at fair value. MPERA adhered to all accounting principles generally accepted by the United States of America. MPERA applied all applicable pronouncements of the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB). 403 90 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 15. EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLANS (CONTINUED) Firefighters’ Unified Retirement System (FURS) (Continued) General Information about the Pension Plan Plan Description The Firefighters’ Unified Retirement System (FURS), administered by the Montana Public Employee Retirement Administration (MPERA), is a multiple-employer, cost-sharing defined benefit plan established in 1981, and governed by Title 19, chapters 2 & 13, Montana Code Annotated (MCA). This plan provides retirement benefits to firefighters employed by first- and second-class cities, other cities and rural fire district departments that adopt the plan, and to firefighters hired by the Montana Air National Guard on or after October 1, 2001. Benefits are established by state law and can only be amended by the Legislature. Benefits Provided The FURS provides retirement, disability, and death benefits to plan members and their beneficiaries. Benefits are based on eligibility, years of service, and highest average compensation (HAC). Member rights are vested after five years of service. Service Retirement and Monthly Benefit Formula • Hired on or after July 1, 1981, or has elected to be covered by GABA: o 20 years of membership service o 2.5% of HAC x years of service credit • Hired prior to July 1, 1981, and who had not elected to be covered by GABA, the greater of above, or: o If membership service is less than 20 years:  2% of the highest monthly compensation (HMC) x years of service credit, and o If membership service is greater or equal to 20 years:  50% of HMC + 2% of HMC x years of service credit in excess of 20, • Early retirement: Age 50 with 5 years of membership service – Normal retirement benefit calculated using HAC and service credit. Second Retirement: Applies to retirement system members re-employed in a FURS position on or after July 1, 2017: • If the member works more than 480 hours in a calendar year and accumulates less than 5 years of service credit before terminating again, the member: o is not awarded service credit for the period of reemployment; o is refunded the accumulated contributions associated with the period of reemployment; o starting the first month following termination of service, receives the same retirement benefit previously paid to the member; and o does not accrue post-retirement benefit adjustments during the term of reemployment but receives a Guaranteed Annual Benefit Adjustment (GABA) in January immediately following second retirement. 404 91 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 15. EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLANS (CONTINUED) Firefighters’ Unified Retirement System (FURS) (Continued) Benefits Provided (Continued) Second Retirement (Continued): • If the member works more than 480 hours in a calendar year and accumulates at least 5 years of service credit before terminating again, the member: o Is awarded service credit for the period of reemployment; o Starting the first month following termination services, receives:  The same retirement benefit previously paid to the member; and  A second retirement benefit for the period of reemployment calculated based on the laws in effect as of the members’ rehire date, and o Does not accrue post-retirement benefit adjustments during the term of reemployment but receives a GABA;  On the initial retirement benefit in January immediately following second retirement, and  On the second retirement benefit starting in January after receiving that benefit for at least 12 months. • A member who returns to covered service is not eligible for a disability benefit. Member’s Compensation Period used in Benefit Calculation • Hired prior to July 1, 1981 and not electing GABA - highest monthly compensation (HMC) • Hired after June 30, 1981 and those electing GABA – highest average compensation (HAC) during any consecutive 36 months (or shorter period of total service). • Part-time firefighter: 15% of regular compensation of a newly confirmed full-time firefighter. Compensation Cap • Hired on or after July 1, 2013 – 110% annual cap on compensation considered as part of a member’s highest average compensation. Guaranteed Annual Benefit Adjustment (GABA) • Hired on or after July 1, 1997, or those electing GABA, and has been retired for at least 12 months – the member’s benefit increases by 3.0% each January. Minimum Benefit Adjustment (non-GABA) • A member with 10 or more years of membership service who has not elected to be covered under GABA - the minimum benefit provided may not be less than 50% of the monthly compensation paid to a newly confirmed active firefighter of the employer that last employed the member as a firefighter in the current fiscal year. 405 92 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 15. EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLANS (CONTINUED) Firefighters’ Unified Retirement System (FURS) (Continued) Overview of Contributions The State Legislature has the authority to establish and amend contribution rates to the plan. Member and employer contribution rates are specified by Montana Statute and are a percentage of the member’s compensation. Contributions are deducted from each member’s salary and remitted by participating employers. Special Funding MCA 19-13-604 requires the State of Montana to contribute a percentage of total compensation directly to the Plan annually after the end of each fiscal year. Member, Employer and State contribution rates are shown in the table below. Non-GABA GABA Employer State 9.50% 10.70% 14.36% 32.61% 7.80%14.36% 32.61% Member Fiscal Year 1998 - 2022 1997 Actuarial Assumptions The total pension liability (TPL) as of June 30, 2021, measurement date, was determined on the results of an actuarial valuation date of June 30, 2020, using the following actuarial assumptions, applied to all periods included in the measurement. Among those assumptions were the following: • Investment Return 7.06% • Admin expense as a % of payroll 0.17% • General Wage Growth* 3.50% *includes Inflation at 2.40% • Merit Increases 0% to 6.30% • Postretirement Benefit Increases o Guaranteed Annual Benefit Adjustment (GABA) each January Members hired on or after July 1, 1997 or those electing GABA, and has been retired for at least 12 months, the member’s benefit increases by a maximum of 3% each January. o Minimum Benefit Adjustment (non-GABA) A member with 10 or more years of membership service who has not elected to be covered under GABA - the minimum benefit provided may not be less than 50% of the monthly compensation paid to a newly confirmed active firefighter of the employer that last employed the member as a firefighter in the current fiscal year. • Mortality assumptions among contributing members, service retired members and beneficiaries are based on RP-2000 Combined Employee and Annuitant Mortality Tables projected to 2020 using Scale BB, males set back 1 year. • Mortality assumptions among disabled members are based on RP-2000 Combined Mortality Tables with no projections. 406 93 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 15. EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLANS (CONTINUED) Firefighters’ Unified Retirement System (FURS) (Continued) Discount Rate The discount rate used to measure the TPL was 7.06%. The projection of cash flows used to determine the discount rate assumed that contributions from participating plan members, employers, and non-employer contributing entities would be made based on the Board’s funding policy, which established the contractually required rates under the Montana Code Annotated. The state contributed 32.61% of the salaries paid by employers. Based on those assumptions, the Plan’s fiduciary net position was projected to be adequate to make all the projected future benefit payments of current plan members through the year 2133. Therefore, the long-term expected rate of return on pension plan investments was applied to all periods of projected benefit payments to determine the TPL. A municipal bond rate was not incorporated in the discount rate. Target Allocations The long-term rate of return as of June 30, 2021, the measurement date, was calculated using the average long-term capital market assumptions published in the Survey of Capital Market Assumptions 2021 Edition by Horizon Actuarial Service, LLC, yielding a median real return of 4.66%. The assumed inflation is based on the intermediate inflation assumption of 2.40% in the 2021 OASDI Trustees Report used by the Chief Actuary for Social Security to produce 75-year cost projections. Combining these two results yields a nominal return of 7.06%. Best estimates of arithmetic real rates of return for each major asset class included in the target asset allocation as of June 30, 2021, the measurement date, are summarized in the table below: Long-Term Expected Target Asset Real Rate of Return Asset Class Allocation Arithmetic Basis Cash 3.00%-0.33% Domestic Equity 30.00%5.90% International Equity 17.00%7.14% Private Investments 15.00%9.13% Real Assets 5.00%4.03% Real Estate 9.00%5.41% Core Fixed Income 15.00%1.14% Non-Core Fixed Income 6.00%3.02% Total 100.00% 407 94 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 15. EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLANS (CONTINUED) Firefighters' Unified Retirement System (FURS) (Continued) Sensitivity of the Proportionate Share of the Net Pension Liability to Changes in the Discount Rate The following presents the employer’s sensitivity of the NPL to the discount rate in the table below. A small change in the discount rate can create a significant change the liability. The NPL was calculated using the discount rate of 7.06%, as well as what the NPL would be if it were calculated using a discount rate 1.00% lower or 1.00% higher than the current rate. As of 1.0% Decrease Current Discount 1.0% Increase Measurement Date at 6.06%Rate at 8.06% City of Bozeman's Net Pension Liability $4,392,013 $1,935,764 -$31,729 Pension Liabilities, Pension Expense, and Deferred Outflows of Resources and Deferred Inflows of Resources Related to Pensions GASB Statement 68 allows a measurement date of up to 12 months before the employer’s fiscal year-end can be utilized to determine the Plan’s TPL. The basis for the TPL as of June 30, 2021, was determined by taking the results of the June 30, 2020, actuarial valuation and applying standard roll forward procedures. The roll forward procedure uses a calculation that adds the annual normal cost (also called the service cost), subtracts the actual benefit payments and refunds for the plan year, and then applies the expected investment rate of return for the year. The roll forward procedure will include the effects of any assumption changes and legislative changes. The update procedures are in conformity with Actuarial Standards of Practice issued by the Actuarial Standards Board. The Total Pension Liability (TPL) minus the Fiduciary Net Position equals the Net Pension Liability (NPL). The proportionate shares of the employer’s and the State of Montana’s NPL for June 30, 2022 and 2021 (reporting dates), are displayed below. The employer’s proportionate share equals the ratio of the employer’s contributions to the sum of all employer and non-employer contributions during the measurement period. Due to the existence of the special funding situation, the state is required to report a proportionate share of a local government’s collective NPL that is associated with the non-state employer. The state’s proportionate share for a particular employer equals the ratio of the contributions for the particular employer to the total state contributions paid. The employer recorded a liability of $1,935,764 and the employer’s proportionate share was 2.2620 percent. As of Reporting Date Net Pension Liability as of 6/30/22 Net Pension Liability as of 6/30/21 Percent of Collective NPL as of 6/30/22 Percent of Collective NPL as of 6/30/21 Change in Percent of Collective NPL City Proportionate Share $ 1,935,764 $ 3,632,981 2.2620%2.3217%-0.0597% State of Montana Proportionate Share associated with Employer 4,393,566 8,189,975 5.1341%5.2340%-0.0999%Total 6,329,330$ 11,822,956$ 7.3961%7.5557%-0.1596% 408 95 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 15. EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLANS (CONTINUED) Firefighters' Unified Retirement System (FURS) (Continued) Pension Liabilities, Pension Expense, and Deferred Outflows of Resources and Deferred Inflows of Resources Related to Pensions (Continued) Changes in Actuarial Assumptions and Methods: The following changes in assumptions or other inputs were made that affected the measurement of the TPL: 1. The discount rate was lowered from 7.34% to 7.06% 2. The investment rate of return was lowered from 7.34% to 7.06% Changes in Benefit Terms: There have been no changes in benefit terms since the previous measurement date. Changes in Proportionate Share: There were no changes between the measurement date of the collective NPL and the employer’s reporting date that are expected to have a significant effect on the employer’s proportionate share of the collective NPL. Pension Expense At June 30, 2022, the reporting date, the employer recognized its proportionate share of the FURS’ pension expense of $357,678. The employer also recognized grant revenue of $838,200 for the support provided by the State of Montana for the proportionate share of the pension expense that is associated with the employer. As of reporting date Pension Expense as of 6/30/22 Pension Expense as of 6/30/21 City’s Proportionate Share 357,678$ 704,126$ Employer Grant Revenue - State of Montana Proportionate Share for Employer 838,200 1,594,757 Total 1,195,878$ 2,298,883$ 409 96 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 15. EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLANS (CONTINUED) Firefighters' Unified Retirement System (FURS) (Continued) Pension Liabilities, Pension Expense, and Deferred Outflows of Resources and Deferred Inflows of Resources Related to Pensions (Continued) Recognition of Deferred Inflows and Outflows At June 30, 2022, the reporting date, the employer reported its proportionate share of the Plan’s deferred outflows of resources and deferred inflows of resources from the following sources: Deferred Outflows of Resources Deferred Inflows of Resources Expected v. actual experience 253,456$ 10,532$ Projected investment earnings v. actual investment earnings - 1,324,282 Changes in assumptions 990,962 - Changes in proportion and differences between employer contributions and proportionate share of contributions - 43,506 Employer contributions subsequent to the measurement date 612,173 - Total 1,856,591$ 1,378,320$ Other amounts reported as deferred outflows and inflows of resources related to pensions will be recognized in Pension Expense as follows: For the Reporting Year ended June 30: Recognition of deferred outflows and deferred inflows in future years as an increase or (decrease) to pension expense 2023 (2,055)$ 2024 (48,251)$ 2026 (150,335)$ 2026 (225,366)$ Thereafter 292,106$ Pension Plan Fiduciary Net Position: The stand-alone financial statements of the Montana Public Employees Retirement Board (PERB) Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) and the GASB 68 Report disclose the Plan’s fiduciary net position. The reports are available from the PERB at PO Box 200131, Helena, MT 59620-0131, (406) 444-3154 or both are available on the MPERA website at https://mpera.mt.gov/about/annualreports1/annualreports. 410 97 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 15. EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLANS (CONTINUED) Municipal Police Officers’ Retirement System (MPORS) In accordance with GASB Statement 68, Accounting and Financial Reporting for Pensions, employers and the non-employer contributing entity are required to recognize and report certain amounts associated with participation in the Municipal Police Officers’ Retirement System (the Plan). This includes the proportionate share of the collective Net Pension Liability; Pension Expense; and Deferred Outflows and Deferred Inflows of Resources associated with pensions. Employers are provided guidance in GASB Statement 68, paragraph 74, where pension amounts must be combined as a total or aggregate for reporting. Whether provided through cost-sharing, single-employer, or agent plans. This report provides information for employers who are using a June 30, 2021 measurement date for the 2022 reporting. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies MPERA prepared financial statements using the accrual basis of accounting. The same accrual basis was used by MPERA for the purposes of determining the Net Pension Liability (NPL); Deferred Outflows of Resources and Deferred Inflows of Resources related to pensions; Pension Expense; the Fiduciary Net Position; and, Additions to or Deductions from Fiduciary Net Position. Member contributions are recognized in the period in which contributions are due. Employer contributions are recognized when due and the employer has made a formal commitment to provide the contributions. Revenues are recognized in the accounting period they are earned and become measurable. Benefit payments and refunds are recognized in the accounting period in which they are due and payable in accordance with the benefit terms. Expenses are recognized in the period incurred. Investments are reported at fair value. MPERA adhered to all accounting principles generally accepted by the United States of America. MPERA applied all applicable pronouncements of the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB). General Information about the Pension Plan Plan Description The Municipal Police Officers’ Retirement System (MPORS), administered by the Montana Public Employee Retirement Administration (MPERA), is a multiple-employer, cost-sharing defined benefit plan established in 1974 and governed by Title 19, chapters 2 & 9, Montana Code Annotated (MCA). This plan provides retirement benefits to all municipal police officers employed by first- and second-class cities and other cities that adopt the plan. Benefits are established by state law and can only be amended by the Legislature. Deferred Retirement Option Plan (DROP): Beginning July 2002, eligible members of MPORS can participate in the DROP by filing a one-time irrevocable election with the Board. The DROP is governed by Title 19, Chapter 9, Part 12, MCA. A member must have completed at least twenty years of membership service to be eligible. They may elect to participate in the DROP for a minimum of one month and a maximum of 60 months and may only participate in the DROP once. A participant remains a member of the MPORS, but will not receive membership service or service credit in the system for the duration of the member’s DROP period. During participation in the DROP, all mandatory contributions continue to the retirement system. A monthly benefit is calculated based on salary and years of service to date as of the beginning of the DROP period. The monthly benefit is paid into the member’s DROP account until the end of the DROP period. At the end of the DROP period, the participant may receive the balance of the DROP account in a lump-sum payment or in a direct rollover to another eligible plan, as allowed by the IRS. If the participant continues employment after the DROP period ends, they will again accrue membership service and service credit. The DROP account cannot be distributed until employment is formally terminated. 411 98 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 15. EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLANS (CONTINUED) Municipal Police Officers’ Retirement System (MPORS) (Continued) Benefits Provided MPORS provides retirement, disability, and death benefits to plan members and their beneficiaries. Benefits are based on eligibility, years of service, and compensation. Member rights are vested after five years of service. Service Retirement and Monthly Benefit Formula: • 20 years of membership service, regardless of age • Age 50 with 5 years of membership service (Early Retirement) • 2.5% of FAC x years of service credit Second Retirement: Re-calculated using specific criteria for members who return to covered MPORS employment prior to July 1, 2017: • Less than 20 years of membership service, upon re-employment, repay benefits and subsequent retirement is based on total MPORS service. • More than 20 years of membership service, upon re-employment, receives initial benefit and a new retirement benefit based on additional service credit and FAC after re-employment. Applies to retirement system members re-employed in a MPORS position on or after July 1, 2017: 1) If the member works more than 480 hours in a calendar year and accumulates less than 5 years of service credit before terminating again, the member: a. Is not awarded service credit for the period of reemployment; b. Is refunded the accumulated contributions associated with the period of reemployment; Starting the first month following termination of service, receives the same retirement benefit previously paid to the member; and c. Does not accrue post-retirement benefit adjustments during the term of reemployment but receives a Guaranteed Annual Benefit Adjustment (GABA) in January immediately following second retirement. 2) If the member works more than 480 hours in a calendar year and accumulates at least 5 years of service credit before terminating again, the member: a. Is awarded service credit for the period of reemployment; b. Starting the first month following termination of service, receives: i. The same retirement benefit previously paid to the member, and ii. A second retirement benefit for the period of reemployment calculated based on the laws in effect as of the member’s rehire date; and 412 99 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 15. EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLANS (CONTINUED) Municipal Police Officers’ Retirement System (MPORS) (Continued) Benefits Provided (Continued) Second Retirement (Continued): c. Does not accrue post-retirement benefit adjustments during the term of reemployment but receives a GABA: i. On the initial retirement benefit in January immediately following second retirement, and ii. On the second retirement benefit starting in January after receiving that benefit for at least 12 months. 3) A member who returns to covered service is not eligible for a disability benefit. Member’s Final Average Compensation (FAC) Hired prior to July 1, 1977 - average monthly compensation of final year of service; Hired on or after July 1, 1977 – final average compensation (FAC) for last consecutive 36 months. Compensation Cap Hired on or after July 1, 2013 – 110% annual cap on compensation considered as part of a member’s highest FAC. Guaranteed Annual Benefit Adjustment (GABA) Hired on or after July 1, 1997, or those electing GABA, and has been retired for at least 12 months, a GABA will be made each year in January equal to 3.0%. Minimum Benefit Adjustment (non-GABA) The minimum benefit provided may not be less than 50% of the compensation paid to a newly confirmed police officer of the employer that last employed the member as a police officer in the current fiscal year. Overview of Contributions The State Legislature has the authority to establish and amend contribution rates to the plan. Member and employer contribution rates are specified by Montana Statute and are a percentage of the member’s compensation. Contributions are deducted from each member’s salary and remitted by participating employers. 413 100 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 15. EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLANS (CONTINUED) Municipal Police Officers’ Retirement System (MPORS) (Continued) Overview of Contributions (Continued) Special Funding MCA 19-9-702 requires the State of Montana to contribute a percentage of total compensation directly to the Plan annually after the end of each fiscal year. Member, Employer and State contribution rates are shown in the table below. Fiscal Year Hired <7/1/75 Hired >6/30/75 Hired >6/30/79 Hired >6/30/97 GABA Employer State 2000-2022 5.800% 7.000% 8.500% 9.000% 14.410% 29.370% 1998- 1999 7.800% 9.000% 10.500% 11.000% 14.410% 29.370% 1997 7.800% 9.000% 10.500%14.360% 29.370% Member Actuarial Assumptions The total pension liability (TPL) as of June 30, 2021, measurement date, was determined on the results of an actuarial valuation date of June 30, 2020, using the following actuarial assumptions, applied to all periods included in the measurement. Among those assumptions were the following: • Investment Return (net of admin expense) 7.06% • Admin Expense as % of Payroll 0.18% • General Wage Growth* 3.50% *includes Inflation at 2.40% • Merit Increases 0% to 6.60% • Postretirement Benefit Increases i. Guaranteed Annual Benefit Adjustment (GABA) each January Hired on or after July 1, 1997, or those electing GABA, and has been retired for at least 12 months, a GABA will be made each year in January equal to 3%. ii. Minimum Benefit Adjustment (non-GABA) Benefit for a retired member or member’s survivor and member did not elect GABA - The minimum benefit provided may not be less than 50% of the compensation paid to a newly confirmed police officer of the employer that last employed the member as a police officer in the current fiscal year. 414 101 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 15. EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLANS (CONTINUED) Municipal Police Officers’ Retirement System (MPORS) (Continued) Actuarial Assumptions (Continued) • Mortality assumptions among contributing members, service retired members and beneficiaries were based on RP-2000 Combined Employee and Annuitant Mortality Tables projected to 2020 using scale BB, set back one year for males. • Mortality assumptions among Disabled Retirees were based on RP-2000 Combined Mortality Tables with no projects. Discount Rate The discount rate used to measure the TPL was 7.06%. The projection of cash flows used to determine the discount rate assumed that contributions from participating plan members, employers, and non-employer contributing entities would be made based on the Board’s funding policy, which established the contractually required rates under the Montana Code Annotated. The state contributed 29.37% of the salaries paid by employers. Based on those assumptions, the Plan’s fiduciary net position was projected to be adequate to make all the projected future benefit payments of current plan members through the year 2134. Therefore, the long-term expected rate of return on pension plan investments was applied to all periods of projected benefit payments to determine the TPL. A municipal bond rate was not incorporated in the discount rate. Target Allocations The long-term rate of return as of June 30, 2021, the measurement date, was calculated using the average long-term capital market assumptions published in the Survey of Capital Market Assumptions 2021 Edition by Horizon Actuarial Service, LLC, yielding a median real return of 4.66%. The assumed inflation is based on the intermediate inflation assumption of 2.40% in the 2021 OASDI Trustees Report used by the Chief Actuary for Social Security to produce 75-year cost projections. Combining these two results yields a nominal return of 7.06%. Best estimates of arithmetic real rates of return for each major asset class included in the target asset allocation as of June 30, 2021, the measurement date, are summarized in the table below: Long-Term Expected Target Asset Real Rate of Return Asset Class Allocation Arithmetic Basis Cash 3.00%-0.33% Domestic Equity 30.00%5.90% International Equity 17.00%7.14% Private Investments 15.00%9.13% Real Assets 5.00%4.03% Real Estate 9.00%5.41% Core Fixed Income 15.00%1.14% Non-Core Fixed Income 6.00%3.02% Total 100.00% 415 102 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 15. EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLANS (CONTINUED) Municipal Police Officers’ Retirement System (MPORS) (Continued) Sensitivity of the Proportionate Share of the Net Pension Liability to Changes in the Discount Rate The following presents the employer’s sensitivity of the NPL to the discount rate in the table below. A small change in the discount rate can create a significant change in the liability. The NPL was calculated using the discount rate of 7.06%, as well as what the NPL would be if it were calculated using a discount rate 1.00% lower or 1.00% higher than the current rate. As of 1.0% Decrease Current Discount 1.0% Increase Measurement Date at 6.06%Rate at 8.06% City of Bozeman's Net Pension Liability $8,716,339 $5,327,439 $2,633,515 Pension Liabilities, Pension Expense, and Deferred Outflows of Resources and Deferred Inflows of Resources Related to Pensions GASB Statement 68 allows a measurement date of up to 12 months before the employer’s fiscal year-end can be utilized to determine the Plan’s TPL. The basis for the TPL as of June 30, 2021, was determined by taking the results of the June 30, 2020, actuarial valuation and applying standard roll forward procedures. The roll forward procedure uses a calculation that adds the annual normal cost (also called the service cost), subtracts the actual benefit payments and refunds for the plan year, and then applies the expected investment rate of return for the year. The roll forward procedure will include the effects of any assumption changes and legislative changes. The update procedures are in conformity with Actuarial Standards of Practice issued by the Actuarial Standards Board. The Total Pension Liability (TPL) minus the Fiduciary Net Position equals the Net Pension Liability (NPL). The proportionate shares of the employer’s and the State of Montana’s NPL for June 30, 2022 and 2021 (reporting dates), are displayed below. The employer’s proportionate share equals the ratio of the employer’s contributions to the sum of all employer and non-employer contributions during the measurement period. Due to the existence of the special funding situation, the state is required to report a proportionate share of a local government’s collective NPL that is associated with the non-state employer. The state’s proportionate share for a particular employer equals the ratio of the contributions for the particular employer to the total state contributions paid. The employer recorded a liability of $5,237,439 and the employer’s proportionate share was 2.9306 percent. As of Reporting Date Net Pension Liability as of 6/30/22 Net Pension Liability as of 6/30/21 Percent of Collective NPL as of 6/30/22 Percent of Collective NPL as of 6/30/21 Change in Percent of Collective NPL City Proportionate Share 5,327,439$ 7,311,248$ 2.9306% 2.9892% -0.0586% State of Montana Proportionate Share associated with Employer 10,828,332$ 14,746,046$ 5.9566% 6.0290% -0.0724% Total 16,155,771$ 22,057,294$ 8.8872% 9.0182% -0.1310% 416 103 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 15. EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLANS (CONTINUED) Municipal Police Officers’ Retirement System (MPORS) (Continued) Pension Liabilities, Pension Expense, and Deferred Outflows of Resources and Deferred Inflows of Resources Related to Pensions (Continued) Changes in Actuarial Assumptions and Methods The following changes in assumptions or other inputs were made that affected the measurement of the TPL: 1. The discount rate was lowered from 7.34% to 7.06% 2. The investment rate of return was lowered from 7.34% to 7.06% Changes in Benefit Terms There have been no changes in benefit terms since the previous measurement date. Changes in Proportionate Share There were no changes between the measurement date of the collective NPL and the employer’s reporting date that are expected to have a significant effect on the employer’s proportionate share of the collective NPL. Pension Expense At June 30, 2022, the reporting date, the employer recognized its proportionate share of the Plan’s pension expense of $834,004. The employer also recognized grant revenue of $1,690,214 for the support provided by the State of Montana for the proportionate share of the pension expense that is associated with the employer. As of reporting date Pension Expense as of 6/30/22 Pension Expense as of 6/30/21 City's Proportionate Share 834,004$ 1,271,558$ State of Montana Proportionate Share associated with the City 1,690,214 2,606,712 Total 2,524,218$ 3,878,270$ 417 104 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 15. EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLANS (CONTINUED) Municipal Police Officers' Retirement System (MPORS) (Continued) Pension Liabilities, Pension Expense, and Deferred Outflows of Resources and Deferred Inflows of Resources Related to Pensions (Continued) Recognition of Deferred Inflows and Outflows At June 30, 2022, the reporting date, the employer reported its proportionate share of MPORS' deferred outflows of resources and deferred inflows of resources related to MPORS from the following sources: As of reporting date Deferred Outflows of Resources Deferred Inflows of Resources Expected v. actual experience 169,440$ 58,175$ Projected investment earnings v. actual investment earnings - 1,604,993 Changes in assumptions 1,017,875 - Changes in proportion and differences between employer contributions and proportionate share of contributions - 3,528 Employer contributions subsequent to the measurement date 810,351 - Total 1,997,666$ 1,666,696$ Other amounts reported as deferred outflows and inflows of resources related to pensions will be recognized in Pension Expense as follows: For the Reporting Year ended June 30: Recognition of deferred outflows and deferred inflows in future years as an increase or (decrease) to pension expense 2023 194,724$ 2024 73,886$ 2025 (228,427)$ 2026 (519,564)$ Thereafter -$ 418 105 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 15. EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLANS (CONTINUED) Municipal Police Officers' Retirement System (MPORS) (Continued) Pension Liabilities, Pension Expense, and Deferred Outflows of Resources and Deferred Inflows of Resources Related to Pensions (Continued) Pension Plan Fiduciary Net Position The stand-alone financial statements of the Montana Public Employees Retirement Board (PERB) Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) and the GASB 68 Report disclose the Plan’s fiduciary net position. The reports are available from the PERB at PO Box 200131, Helena, MT 59620-0131, (406) 444-3154 or both are available on the MPERA website at https://mpera.mt.gov/about/annualreports1/annualreports. NOTE 16. POST-EMPLOYMENT BENEFITS OTHER THAN PENSIONS In addition to providing a deferred compensation plan, the City provides other post-employment benefits (OPEB) allowing its retired employees to continue their medical, dental, and vision care coverage through the City's group health plan until death (Retiree Health Plan). The single-employer defined benefit post-employment health care plan allows retirees to participate, as a group, at a rate that does not cover all of the related costs. This results in the reporting of an implied rate subsidy in the financial statements and footnotes. The City's contract with Allegiance Benefits details the plan eligibility. MMIA is the administrator of the plan, which covers both active and retired members. In accordance with MCA 2-18-704, the City’s retirees may continue coverage for themselves and their covered eligible dependents, if they are eligible for public employees' retirement by virtue of their employment with the City of Bozeman. The City's current labor contracts do not include any obligations for payments to retirees. The City also allows terminated employees to continue their health care coverage for 18 months past the date of termination as required by the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 (COBRA). OPEB is recorded on an accrual basis for all enterprise and internal service funds. OPEB is recorded on a modified accrual basis for the governmental funds. Plan contributions are recognized in the period in which the contributions are made. Benefits and refunds are recognized when due and payable in accordance with the terms of the plan. No assets are accumulated in a trust that meets the criteria in paragraph 4 of Statement 75. Funding Policy The plan is unfunded by the City and plan members receiving benefits contribute 100 percent of their cost of the benefits on a pay-as-you-go basis. The City plan’s administratively established retiree medical, dental, and vision premiums vary between $41 and $2,313 per month depending on the medical plan selected, family coverage, and Medicare eligibility. The plan provides different coinsurance amounts depending on whether members use preferred, non-preferred, or other hospitals. Depending on the plan, for a single individual, after an annual deductible of $500 to $2,800 for non-Medicare-eligible retirees, the plan reimburses 60% to 80% of allowed charges after deductible and up to the out-of-pocket maximum, and then 100%. Depending on the plan, for a family, after an annual deductible of $1,000 to $5,600 for non-Medicare-eligible retirees, the plan reimburses 60% to 80% of allowed charges after deductible and up to the out-of-pocket maximum, and then 100%. 419 106 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 16. POST-EMPLOYMENT BENEFITS OTHER THAN PENSIONS (CONTINUED) Employees Covered by Benefit Terms At June 30, 2020, the census valuation date, the following employees were covered by the benefit terms: Category Count Active employees 462 Inactive employees or beneficiaries currently receiving benefit payments 32 Total 494 Contributions Benefit contributions are paid by the City as they come due. Total OPEB Liability (TOL) The City’s total OPEB liability of $5,067,116 was measured as of June 30, 2021, and was determined by an actuarial valuation as of that date. Changes in the TOL for the year ended June 30, 2022 are as follows: Service cost 348,856$ Interest on OPEB obligation 101,891 Difference between expected & actual expense - Benefits paid (147,232) Changes in assumptions 428,413 Changes in OPEB obligation 731,928 OPEB obligation - beginning of year 4,335,188 OPEB obligation - end of year 5,067,116$ There is sensitivity of the TOL to changes in the discount rate. The TOL of the City as well as what the City’s TOL would be if it were calculated using a discount rate that is one percentage point lower (1.16%) or one percentage point higher (3.16%) follows: 1% Decrease Discount Rate 1% Increase (1.16%)(2.16%)(3.16%) Total OPEB liability 5,732,304$ 5,067,116$ 4,487,828$ 420 107 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 16. POST-EMPLOYMENT BENEFITS OTHER THAN PENSIONS (CONTINUED) Total OPEB Liability (TOL) (Continued) There is also sensitivity of the TOL to changes in the healthcare cost rates. The TOL of the City as well as what the City’s TOL would be if it were recalculated using healthcare cost trend rates that are one percentage point lower (6.5%) or one percentage point higher (8.5%) than the current healthcare cost trend rate follows: 1% Decrease Discount Rate 1% Increase (6.5%)(7.5%)(8.5%) Total OPEB liability 4,330,394$ 5,067,116$ 5,964,936$ For the year ended June 30, 2022, the City recognized an OPEB expense of $650,008. At June 30 2022, the City reported deferred outflows of resources and deferred inflows of resources related to OPEB from the following sources: Deferred Deferred Outflows of Inflows of Resources Resources Difference between excepted and actual experience -$ (220,940)$ Changes of assumptions 1,350,337 (376,951) Total 1,350,337$ (597,891)$ Amounts reported as deferred outflows of resources and deferred inflows of resources related to OPEB will be recognized in OPEB expense as follows: 2023 199,261$ 2024 199,261 2025 199,263 2026 238,801 2027 16,051 Thereafter (100,191) Total 752,446$ Year Ended June 30: 421 108 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 16. POST-EMPLOYMENT BENEFITS OTHER THAN PENSIONS (CONTINUED) Total OPEB Liability (TOL) (Continued) The June 30, 2022, year-end OPEB cost is reported in the City’s funds as follows: Functions/Programs Expenses PRIMARY GOVERNMENT Governmental activities: General government 130,540$ Public safety 221,443 Public service 92,610 Public welfare 156,952 Total governmental activities 601,545 Business-type activities: Water 43,589 Wastewater 34,110 Solid waste 33,255 Parking 8,547 Stormwater 10,878 Total business-type activities 130,379 Total primary government 731,924$ Actuarial Methods and Assumptions The City’s actuarial valuation is completed on a biennial frequency, provided no significant events have occurred warranting new measurement. The City completed the valuation for fiscal year 2021, with an estimate provided for fiscal year 2022. For fiscal year 2022, an estimated valuation was derived based on the 2021 actual costs and participants. As a result of this biennial valuation, we have marked the fields as “n/a” where actual financial data was not used to generate the estimate. As of July 1, 2021, the most recent valuation date, the City’s total OPEB liability was determined using the following actuarial assumptions: The following key assumptions were chosen by the City: 1. Discount Rate: 2.16% for determining fiscal 2022 disclosure and estimated fiscal 2022 expense; 2.21% for determining fiscal 2021 liability and fiscal 2021 expense. 2. Inflation Rate: 2.5% long-term. 3. Expected Real Rate of Return on Assets: N/A 4. Health Care Claim and Contribution Trend Rates: 7.50% initial in fiscal 2022 and 4.5% ultimate in fiscal 2042. 5. Average Salary Increase: Updated from 1.50% in fiscal 2021 to 0.00% in fiscal 2022. 422 109 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 16. POST-EMPLOYMENT BENEFITS OTHER THAN PENSIONS (CONTINUED) Actuarial Methods and Assumptions (Continued) 6. Retirement Rates: Based on actuarial valuation for statewide retirement systems as of June 30, 2021 7. Retiree Participation Rate: 35% 8. Lapse Rate: 15% per year 9. Marriage Assumption: For future retirees, 60% of participants are assumed to be married, with husbands 3 years older than wives The discount rate was based on a yield or index rate for a 20-year, tax-exempt, general obligation municipal bond with an average rating of AA/Aa or higher. Rates were taken from the Bond Buyer 20-Bond GO index as of the measurement date. Mortality rates were based on the Pub-2010 Public Retirement Plan Public Safety mortality table projected generationally with Scale MP-2021 for MPORS and FURS (Police and Fire, respectively) and Pub-2010 Public Retirement Plans General mortality table projected generationally with Scale MP-2021 for PERS (all other employees). The medical trend rate table was reset in fiscal 2022. This report constitutes the only analysis and presentation of the City’s post-employment benefit plan. There is no separate, audited GAAP-basis post-employment benefit plan report. NOTE 17. JOINT VENTURE AGREEMENTS Joint ventures are legal entities or other organizations that result in a contractual arrangement and that are owned, operated, or governed by two or more participants. Each participant retains both an ongoing financial interest and an ongoing financial responsibility. As of June 30, 2022, the City has entered into joint venture contractual arrangements, as follows: 911 Communication Center The City and Gallatin County, Montana (the County) have entered into an inter-local agreement for the purposes of establishment of the operation and financing of a 911 communication services division (the Division) for dispatch and records services, to define the relationship of the Administrative Board with the City and County, and to establish the line of authority for personnel furnishing the communication services to the City and County and others who may contract for the services. 423 110 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 17. JOINT VENTURE AGREEMENTS (CONTINUED) City-County Drug Forfeitures The City and County have entered into an inter-local agreement for the purposes of establishment of a joint drug forfeiture account funded from drug related forfeitures, seizures, and prosecutions of City and County law enforcement cases and to establish an equitable means of distributing those funds to continue drug interdiction activities. The goal of the agreement is to make the City and County Drug Enforcement operations less reliant on the general and public safety fund monies of the City and County. The original term of the agreement was for a period of one year, beginning September 20, 2004 and automatically renews for a period of one year until terminated by either party with written notice of intent to terminate. Financial information regarding the joint drug forfeiture account can be obtained by contacting the City of Bozeman Department of Finance, 411 East Main Street, Bozeman, MT 59715. The County and City have entered into various other joint venture contractual arrangements, memorandums of understanding and inter-local agreements to support the following programs and/or operations: Victim Witness, Hazardous Materials, Solid Waste (Disposal and Convenient Site), Fire Warden/Chief, Evidence Technician, Library Services, Board of Health, and rental of the Law and Justice Center. The financial interests are not material. Montana Municipal Interlocal Authority The City and Montana Municipal Interlocal Authority (MMIA) have entered into a 20-year agreement in December 2012 to share up to $1 million in profits from the sale of city-owned property known as the Mandeville Farm. The agreement came about as part of a settlement on legal claims from the City of Bozeman vs. MMIA litigation. A “profit” shall occur only when the City has recovered its total investment in the property, which includes the original purchase price together with all “costs of development” as defined in the settlement agreement. 424 111 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 18. INTERFUND TRANSFERS AND ASSETS/LIABILITIES A summary of interfund transfers reported in the fund financial statements for the year ended June 30, 2022, follows: American Capital Nonmajor General Fund Rescue Plan Act Projects Governmental Total General Fund -$ 131,139$ -$ 4,835,026$ 4,966,165$ SID Debt Service 2,077,709 - - - 2,077,709 Capital projects 7,261 - - 738,101 745,362 Nonmajor Governmental 725,048 - 257,102 2,030,796 3,012,946 Water Enterprise - 843,241 - - 843,241 Nonmajor Enterprise 553,735 - - - 553,735 Total 3,363,753$ 974,380$ 257,102$ 7,603,923$ 12,199,158$ Governmental Funds Transfers From Transfers To Transfers are used to (1) move revenues from the fund that statute or budgets requires to collect them to the fund that statute or budgets require to expend them, (2) use unrestricted revenues collected in the general fund to finance various programs accounted for in other funds in accordance with budgetary authorizations, and (3) to transfer non-restricted interest income from the permanent fund to the general fund. General Fund transfers in from the American Rescue Plan Act fund covered general government services expenses as allowable under the revenue recovery federal grant terms. General Fund transfers in from nonmajor governmental funds were for health insurance expenses and to move available funding from the revolving loan fund. The available funding from the revolving loan fund was transferred to the SID Debt Service fund. Capital projects funds transfers in from nonmajor governmental funds covered a portion of street reconstruction projects. Nonmajor governmental funds transfers in from the General Fund financed special revenue fund expenses due to grant programs ending during the fiscal year and to move funding to the economic development loan fund. Nonmajor governmental funds transfers in from Capital Projects funds returned available cash upon project completion. Nonmajor governmental funds transfers in from other nonmajor governmental funds included gas tax funding financing project expenses in the arterial and collector fund, as well as funding for tax increment financing district debt payments. 425 112 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 18. INTERFUND TRANSFERS AND ASSETS/LIABILITIES (CONTINUED) Nonmajor enterprise funds transfers in from the General Fund financed landfill monitoring costs. Water fund transfers in from the American Rescue Plan Act fund covered capital expenses for several infrastructure projects in accordance with federal grant terms. A summary of advances and due from/to other funds at June 30, 2022, is as follows: Advances to Advances from other City funds other City funds Major Fund: SID Debt Service -$ 693,010$ Nonmajor Governmental Fund: SID Revolving Debt Service 693,010 - 693,010$ 693,010$ Due from Due to other City funds other City funds Major Funds: General fund 2,212,310$ -$ SID Debt Service - 1,109,264 Nonmajor Governmental Fund: G.O. Bonds - 311,239 Internal Service Fund: Vehicle Maintenance - 773,242 Medical Health Insurance - 18,565 2,212,310$ 2,212,310$ Interfund balances reported as due from or due to other funds are usually a result of transfers for reporting purposes to cover negative cash balances within a fund that are anticipated to be covered by revenue in the fund in the future. These transfers are reversed as cash becomes available in a fund where cash previously had been in a deficit. 426 113 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 19. RISK MANAGEMENT The City faces a considerable number of risks of loss, including a) damage to and loss of property and contents, b) employee torts, c) professional liability (i.e. errors and omissions), d) environmental damage, e) workers' compensation (i.e. employee injuries), and f) medical insurance cost of employees. A variety of methods are used to provide insurance for these risks. Commercial policies, transferring all risks of loss except for small deductible amounts, are purchased for property and content damage and professional liabilities. The City participates in two state-wide public risk pools operated by the Montana Municipal Interlocal Authority (MMIA), for workers' compensation and for tort liability. Employee medical insurance is provided through a cost-sharing multiple-employer defined benefit plan administered by MMIA. The plan offers health, dental and vision benefits and flexible spending and health savings accounts. Given the lack of coverage available, the City has no coverage for potential losses from environmental damages. Commercial Policies Coverage limits and the deductibles on the commercial policies have stayed relatively constant for the last several years. The premiums for the policies are allocated between the City's Enterprise Funds and the General Fund. Premiums are subsidized through a special purpose property tax levy, based on total appropriations. Settled claims resulting from these risks did not exceed commercial insurance coverage during the three years ended June 30, 2022, 2021, and 2020. Public Entity Risk Pools In 1986, the City joined together with other Montana cities to form the Montana Municipal Interlocal Authority, which established a workers' compensation plan and a tort liability plan. Both public entity risk pools currently operate as common risk management and insurance programs for the member governments. The liability limits for damages in tort action are $750,000 per claim and $1.5 million per occurrence, and $12.5 million per occurrence for any claim that is not subject to the limitations on governmental liability, as described in Montana Code Annotated Section 2-9-108 (the Statute) or any successor statute, either as matter of law, by operation of the Statute, or by a judicial determination that the Statute is inapplicable or is otherwise invalid, with $11,250 deductible per occurrence. State tort law limits the City's liability to $1.5 million. The City pays premiums for its employee injury insurance coverage, which is allocated to the employer funds based on total salaries and wages. The agreements for formation of the pools provide that they will be self-sustaining through member premiums. The tort liability plan and workers' compensation program issued debt of $4.41 million and $6.155 million, respectively, to immediately finance the necessary insurance reserves. All members signed a contingent note for a pro rata share of this liability in case operating revenues were insufficient to cover the debt service; the debt was retired in 2011. The City also owns a policy with MMIA for loss or damage to property. This is an all-risk policy, essentially all property owned by the City being insured for 100% of replacement cost, subject to a $5,000 deductible per occurrence. MMIA reinsures their property insurance with a national municipal pool, Public Entities’ Property Insurance. 427 114 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 20. CONTINGENCIES Various claims and lawsuits involving the City can be pending at any given time. These claims are either covered by insurance or are the types which are normal in City operations and do not present any material risk of financial disruption. City management believes that the total amount of liability, if any, which may arise from such claims and lawsuits beyond that which is covered by insurance would not have a material effect on the City's financial condition or its ability to carry out its activities. NOTE 21. SOLID WASTE LANDFILL CLOSURE AND POST-CLOSURE CARE COSTS The City has a municipal solid waste landfill. State and Federal laws and regulations require the City to place a final cover on its landfill site when it stops accepting waste and to perform certain maintenance and monitoring functions at the site for 30 years after final closure. The City stopped accepting waste effective June 30, 2008. The final capping of the cells is still pending. The City has accrued a liability for $1,175,032, which is its estimate of future landfill closure and post-closure care costs as of June 30, 2022. This amount is based on a Corrective Measures Assessment completed in September 2014 by a third-party engineering firm, from which a remediation plan has been adopted by the City and has been approved by the Montana Department of Environmental Quality. The cost of post closure care is an estimate and is subject to changes resulting from inflation, deflation, technology, or changes in applicable laws or regulations. 428 115 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 21. SOLID WASTE LANDFILL CLOSURE AND POST-CLOSURE CARE COSTS (CONTINUED) The Solid Waste Fund accounts for the City’s solid waste collection, recycling, and disposal utility operation – including assets, liabilities, and post-closure costs associated with the closed Story Mill landfill. Segment information for the landfill is as follows: Condensed Statement of Net Position Restricted cash and cash equivalents 131,659$ Accrued interest 164 Capital assets, net of depreciation 758,973 Total assets 890,796$ Current liabilities 19,804$ Closure and post-closure care cost 1,175,032 Total liabilities 1,194,836 Restricted for debt service (304,040) Total net position (304,040) Total liabilities and net position 890,796$ Condensed Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Net Position Operating revenues and expenses: Operating revenues -$ Operating expenses Depreciation 18,425 Change in post closure cost estimate (33,087) Other operating - Total operating expenses (14,662) Operating profit 14,662 Non-operating revenues (expenses): Interest income 619 Interest expense (3,953) Transfers 359,000 Total non-operating revenues 355,666 Change in net position 370,328 Net position, beginning of year (674,368) Net position, end of year (304,040)$ 429 116 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 22. IMPACT FEES On January 22, 1996, the City Commission adopted fire, water, waste water and street impact fees in Ordinance number 1414. The impact fees were first effective on March 23, 1996. Impact fees were set at a percentage of the cost of the impact, to be phased out over 5 years. Beginning on March 30, 2013, all impact fees are charged at 100% of the impact. An applicant may obtain an Impact Fee Credit by dedication of non-site-related land or construction of non-site-related improvements. Credits must be made before the beginning of improvement construction, must comply with the City’s Capital Improvements Program, and must be approved by the City Commission. Credits may be used only for like-type impact fees. The full provisions for impact fee credits are contained in Chapter 3.24 of the Bozeman Municipal Code. For proprietary type funds, the City records a liability for the impact fee credit and capitalizes the underlying asset. For governmental-type funds, the credits are only disclosed in the footnotes. For government-wide financial reporting, the outstanding credits are reported as unearned revenue. The Water Impact Fee Fund, Street Impact Fee Fund, and Waste Water Impact Fee Fund have recorded impact fee credits amounting to $33,232, $56,343, and $129,042, respectively, for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2022. The Fire Impact Fee Fund does not have any outstanding credits. The following impact fee revenues were collected and expensed/expended during fiscal year 2022: Expenses, Beginning Expenditures, Balances Impact Fees Other Income and Transfers Ending Balances Fire 3,813,371$ 615,771$ (109,009)$ (32,966)$ 4,287,167$ Water 10,696,905 3,817,737 1,727,967 (960,689) 15,281,920 Waste water 7,847,593 2,295,758 15,582 (365,907) 9,793,026 Streets 8,005,408 8,426,720 12,167 (3,225,423) 13,218,872 Total 30,363,277$ 15,155,986$ 1,646,707$ (4,584,985)$ 42,580,985$ 430 117 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 23. POLLUTION REMEDIATION OBLIGATIONS Jewel v. City of Bozeman / State of Montana v. City of Bozeman This action was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Montana. The multi-count complaint reduced itself to a cost recovery action under the Federal Superfund (CERCLA) and State Superfund (CECRA). On July 8, 1999, the City, Jewel Food Stores, Inc. and the other parties reached a final settlement agreement in this action. The settlement, in part, required Jewel Food Stores, Inc. to pay the City of Bozeman $1,200,000, the City and Jewel to extend alternative water supply to businesses and residents in the North 19th Avenue area of the City; and Jewel and the City to share specified remediation costs on an equal basis (50% each) up to a cumulative amount of $4,000,000, and for eligible costs in excess of that amount, to be shared 70% by Jewel and 30% by the City. The City is reimbursed by insurers for 23% of the City’s expenditures for these purposes. The Montana Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) issued the Record of Decision (ROD) for the Bozeman Solvent Site (BSS) in August 2011. The Administrative Order of Consent (AOC) was finalized in January 2012. The ROD and AOC specifically delineate the remediation to be completed for the BSS. The AOC serves as the legal mechanism for the implementation of the selected remedies identified in the ROD. Though remediation is currently underway and may be completed relatively quickly, monitoring of the site will continue for a period of up to 30 years. Tasman Geosciences, Inc. serves as the contractor for the potentially liable parties (the City of Bozeman and CVS Pharmacy, Inc.). Based on the selected remedies identified in the ROD, Tasman has completed a long-term cost projection for the project in February 2016. The long-term cost projection was reviewed in September 2017 and, at that time, it was determined it was still an accurate projection. This cost projection includes all remediation and monitoring cost, as well as, the MDEQ cost recovery associated with the BSS. The long-term cost projection for the City is $2,089,997 in remediation costs. Reduced by its insurer’s reimbursement, the amount is $782,927. This liability is recorded in the Waste Water Fund, is an estimate, and is subject to changes resulting from inflation, deflation, technology, or changes in applicable laws or regulations. CMC Asbestos Bozeman CECRA Facility In 2001, the City purchased property located within the CMC Asbestos Bozeman Facility (the “Facility”), a former asbestos ore storage and processing, recycling/salvage yard. In 2002, contractors for the City, under the Montana Voluntary Cleanup and Redevelopment Act (VCRA), submitted a Voluntary Cleanup Plan (VCP), which was approved by the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). Remediation work on City-owned property was completed in October 2003. On December 21, 2006, the City agreed to complete remedial actions at the remainder of the Facility, which included adjacent, private properties. The City submitted an Addendum to its original VCP, and cleanup work under the approved Addendum was completed in June 2009. On October 20, 2010, the City received notice from the DEQ stating that no further action is required at the facility and that the DEQ proposes removing the Facility from the CECRA priority list. Pursuant to an August 2007 Stipulated Agreement between the City and all other involved parties, additional cleanup after issuance of the DEQ’s closure letter may be required by DEQ based upon property use changes, modification of structures, or other factors. 431 118 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 NOTE 23. POLLUTION REMEDIATION OBLIGATIONS (CONTINUED) CMC Asbestos Bozeman CECRA Facility (Continued The City has an ongoing claim against the State orphan share for the orphan share funds’ proportional share of these post-closure clean-up costs. In addition, all other parties are still liable for their proportional share of the clean-up. The result is that should additional work be required at the Facility, the City will only be liable for 1% of the total post-closure clean-up costs. NOTE 24. COMMITMENTS The City entered into a contract to construct the Bozeman Public Safety Center. The contract commitment for the project is $37,287,116. For the year ended June 30, 2022, the City had incurred $35,129,852 towards the project, which is reported as construction in progress in the Statement of Net Position. The City entered into various contracts for various road and streetscape projects. The contract commitments for the projects are $12,671,825. For the year ended June 30, 2022, the City had incurred $4,994,108 towards the projects. The City entered into a contract to design Fire Station #2. The design contract commitment for the project is $678,522. For the year ended June 30, 2022, the City had incurred $278,972. The construction portion of the project will go out to bid in fiscal year 2023. The City entered into contracts to design and construct the Library Renovation project. The contract commitments for design and construction total $4,787,241. For the year ended June 30, 2022, the City had incurred $582,878 towards the project, which have been paid for primarily from donations by the Bozeman Public Library Foundation. The City entered into a contract for construction services for the Sourdough Water Transmission Main, Phase 2 project. The contract commitment for the project is $4,105,304. For the year ended June 30, 2022, the City had incurred $1,519,582 towards the project. The City entered into contracts for design and construction services for the Solids Dewatering Building Expansion and Headwaters Building Improvements projects. The contracts commitments for the projects are $2,922,244. For the year ended June 30, 2022, the City had incurred $2,720,275 towards the projects. 432 C. REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION OTHER THAN MANAGEMENT DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS 433 119 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA SCHEDULE OF CHANGES IN TOTAL OPEB LIABILITY AND RELATED RATIOS Year Ended June 30, 2022 GASB Statement No. 75 was implemented beginning in fiscal year 2018. This Statement requires supplementary information for 10-year schedules containing service cost, changes of benefit terms, if any, differences between expected and actual experience, changes of actuarial assumptions or other inputs, and benefit payments, as applicable to the Local Government’s OPEB plan and method of calculating OPEB liability. Assets are not accumulated in a trust that meets the criteria in GASB Statement No. 75, paragraph 4 to pay related benefits. The total OPEB liability and ratio of OPEB liability as a percentage of covered-employee payroll as of June 30, 2022 is determined as follows: Total OPEB Liability 2022 2021 2020 2019 2018 Service cost 348,856$ 218,391$ 224,433$ 180,183$ 256,948$ Interest 101,891 105,950 105,809 88,126 81,562 Assumption changes 428,413 1,270,632 86,881 225,374 (653,711) Difference between expected and actual experience - (8,615) - (502,125) 431,737 Benefit payments (147,232) (119,793) (116,330) (118,184) (431,737) Net change in total OPEB liability 731,928 1,466,565 300,793 (126,626) (315,201) Total OPEB liability - beginning of year 4,335,188 2,868,623 2,567,830 2,694,455 3,009,656 Total OPEB liability - ending of year 5,067,116$ 4,335,188$ 2,868,623$ 2,567,829$ 2,694,455$ Covered-employee payroll 27,432,420$ 26,119,539$ 24,490,157$ 23,503,572$ 45,345,305$ Total OPEB liability as a percentage of covered-employee payroll 18.47%16.60%11.71%10.93%5.94% * Schedule is intended to show information for 10 years. Additional years will be displayed as they become available. Assumption changes. Changes of assumptions reflect the effects of changes in the discount rate used each period. The following are the discount rates used for each period presented: 6/30/2022 2.16% 6/30/2021 2.21% 6/30/2020 3.50% 6/30/2019 3.87% 6/30/2018 3.13% 434 120 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA SCHEDULE OF PROPORTIONATE SHARE OF NET PENSION LIABILITY AND SCHEDULE OF CONTRIBUTIONS For the Last Ten Fiscal Years* Schedule of Proportionate Share of the Net Pension Liability: As of Measurement Date 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 Employer's proportion of the net pension liability (percentage)0.8410% 0.8522% 0.8620% 0.8336% 1.0419% 1.0218% 0.9588% 0.91505% Employer's net pension liability (amount) $ 15,249,847 $ 22,483,506 $ 18,018,037 $ 17,399,265 $ 20,291,988 $ 17,404,143 $ 13,403,285 $ 11,401,613 State's net pension liability (amount) $ 4,507,680 $ 7,096,303 $ 5,867,557 $ 5,822,595 $ 266,967 $ 212,659 $ 164,637 $ 139,231 Total $ 19,757,527 $ 29,579,809 $ 23,885,594 $ 23,221,860 $ 20,558,955 $ 17,616,802 $ 13,567,922 $ 11,540,844 Employer's covered payroll $ 14,855,905 $ 14,298,930 $ 14,222,530 $ 13,764,340 $ 12,924,792 $ 12,238,920 $ 11,189,797 $ 10,479,122 Employer's proportionate share as a percent of covered payroll 102.65% 157.24% 126.69% 126.41% 157.00% 142.20% 119.78% 108.80% Plan fiduciary net position as a percent of total pension liability 79.91%68.90%73.85%73.47%73.75%74.71%78.40%79.90% Schedule of Contributions: As of Reporting Date 2022 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 Contractually required DB contributions $ 1,411,242 $ 1,302,862 $ 1,239,718 $ 1,223,234 $ 1,161,210 $ 1,081,810 $ 1,022,996 $ 922,084 Plan choice rate required contributions $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 28,892 $ 52,151 Contributions in relation to the contractually required contributions $ 1,411,242 $ 1,302,862 $ 1,239,718 $ 1,223,234 $ 1,161,210 $ 1,081,810 $ 1,051,888 $ 974,235 Contribution deficiency (excess) $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Employer's covered payroll $ 15,910,277 $ 14,855,905 $ 14,298,930 $ 14,222,530 $ 13,764,340 $ 12,924,792 $ 12,238,920 $ 11,189,797 Contributions as a percent of covered payroll 8.87%8.77%8.67%8.60%8.44%8.37%8.59%8.71% PERS PERS *The amounts presented for each fiscal year were determined as of June 30. Schedule is intended to show information for 10 years. Additional years will be displayed as they become available. 435 121 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA SCHEDULE OF PROPORTIONATE SHARE OF NET PENSION LIABILITY AND SCHEDULE OF CONTRIBUTIONS (CONTINUED) Year Ended June 30, 2022 Schedule of Proportionate Share of the Net Pension Liability: As of Measurement Date 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 Employer's proportion of the net pension liability (percentage)2.2620% 2.3217% 2.1955% 2.3663% 2.3492% 2.3705% 2.4336% 2.4192% Employer's net pension liability (amount) $ 1,935,764 $ 3,632,985 $ 2,518,508 $ 2,725,281 $ 2,655,380 $ 2,707,390 $ 2,489,054 $ 2,361,551 State's net pension liability (amount) $ 4,393,566 $ 8,189,975 $ 6,091,025 $ 6,231,502 $ 6,030,078 $ 6,134,093 $ 5,543,784 $ 5,327,544 Total $ 6,329,330 $ 11,822,960 $ 8,609,533 $ 8,956,783 $ 8,685,458 $ 8,841,483 $ 8,032,838 $ 7,689,095 Employer's covered payroll $ 4,162,698 $ 4,052,989 $ 3,807,151 $ 3,726,746 $ 3,511,860 $ 3,338,041 $ 3,270,451 $ 3,142,481 Employer's proportionate share as a percent of covered payroll 46.50%89.64%66.15%73.13%75.61%81.11%76.11%75.15% Plan fiduciary net position as a percent of total pension liability 87.72%75.34%80.08%79.03%77.77%75.48%76.90%76.71% Schedule of Contributions: As of Reporting Date 2022 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 Contractually required contributions $ 612,173 $ 595,510 $ 596,564 $ 524,670 $ 548,518 $ 504,303 $ 477,250 $ 478,776 Contributions in relation to the contractually required contributions $ 612,173 $ 595,510 $ 596,564 $ 524,670 $ 548,518 $ 504,303 $ 477,250 $ 478,776 Contribution deficiency (excess) $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Employer's covered payroll $ 4,263,039 $ 4,162,698 $ 4,052,989 $ 3,807,151 $ 3,726,746 $ 3,511,860 $ 3,338,041 $ 3,270,451 Contributions as a percent of covered payroll 14.36%14.31%14.72%13.78%14.72%14.36%14.30%14.64% FURS FURS *The amounts presented for each fiscal year were determined as of June 30. Schedule is intended to show information for 10 years. Additional years will be displayed as they become available. 436 122 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA SCHEDULE OF PROPORTIONATE SHARE OF NET PENSION LIABILITY AND SCHEDULE OF CONTRIBUTIONS (CONTINUED) Year Ended June 30, 2022 Schedule of Proportionate Share of the Net Pension Liability: As of Measurement Date 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 Employer's proportion of the net pension liability (percentage)2.9306% 2.9892% 2.8699% 2.9325% 3.0402% 3.0842% 2.9746% 3.0209% Employer's net pension liability (amount) $ 5,327,439 $ 7,311,248 $ 5,712,381 $ 5,022,189 $ 5,408,979 $ 5,552,007 $ 4,920,638 $ 4,746,933 State's net pension liability (amount) $ 10,828,332 $ 14,746,046 $ 11,632,402 $ 10,266,345 $ 11,024,418 $ 11,020,975 $ 9,969,680 $ 9,589,371 Total $ 16,155,771 $ 22,057,294 $ 17,344,783 $ 15,288,534 $ 16,433,397 $ 16,572,982 $ 14,890,318 $ 14,336,304 Employer's covered payroll $ 5,303,838 $ 5,120,608 $ 4,729,931 $ 4,628,804 $ 4,555,121 $ 4,353,897 $ 4,116,930 $ 4,053,265 Employer's proportionate share as a percent of covered payroll 100.44% 142.78% 120.77% 108.50% 118.75% 127.52% 119.52% 117.11% Plan fiduciary net position as a percent of total pension liability 75.76%64.84%68.84%70.95%68.34%65.62%66.90%67.01% Schedule of Contributions:As of Reporting Date 2022 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 Contractually required contributions $ 810,351 $ 763,261 $ 732,880 $ 684,296 $ 692,318 $ 655,143 $ 637,789 $ 596,791 Contributions in relation to the contractually required contributions $ 810,351 $ 763,261 $ 732,880 $ 684,296 $ 692,318 $ 655,143 $ 637,789 $ 596,791 Contribution deficiency (excess) $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Employer's covered payroll $ 5,623,538 $ 5,303,838 $ 5,120,608 $ 4,729,931 $ 4,628,804 $ 4,555,121 $ 4,353,897 $ 4,116,930 Contributions as a percent of covered payroll 14.41%14.39%14.31%14.47%14.96%14.38%14.65%14.50% MPORS MPORS *The amounts presented for each fiscal year were determined as of June 30. Schedule is intended to show information for 10 years. Additional years will be displayed as they become available. 437 123 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION - PENSION PLAN CHANGES Year Ended June 30, 2022 CHANGE OF BENEFIT TERMS The following changes to the PERS, FURS, and MPORS plan provisions were made as identified: 2017 Legislative Changes – PERS: Working Retiree Limitations – for PERS Effective July 1, 2017, if a PERS retiree returns as an independent contractor to what would otherwise be PERS-covered employment, general contractor overhead costs are excluded from PERS working retiree limitations. Refunds 1) Terminating members eligible to retire may, in lieu of receiving a monthly retirement benefit, refund their accumulated contributions in a lump sum. 2) Terminating members with accumulated contributions between $200 and $1,000 who wish to rollover their refund must do so within 90 days of termination of service. 3) Trusts, estates, and charitable organizations listed as beneficiaries are entitled to receive only a lump-sum payment. Interest Credited To Member Accounts Effective July 1, 2017, the interest rate credited to member accounts increased from 0.25% to 0.77%. Lump-Sum Payouts Effective July 1, 2017, lump-sum payouts in all systems are limited to the member’s accumulated contributions rate than the present value of the member’s benefit. Disabled PERS Defined Contribution (DC) Members PERS members hired after July 1, 2011 have a normal retirement age of 65. PERS DC members hired after July 1, 2011 who became disabled were previously only eligible for a disability benefit until age 65. Effective July 1, 2017, these individuals will be eligible for a disability benefit until they reach 70, thus ensuring the same 5-year time period available to PERS DC disabled members hired prior to July 1, 2011 who have a normal retirement age of 60 and are eligible for a disability benefit until age 65. 438 124 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION - PENSION PLAN CHANGES (CONTINUED) Year Ended June 30, 2022 CHANGE OF BENEFIT TERMS (CONTINUED) 2017 Legislative Changes – FURS: Working Retiree Limitations – for FURS Applies to retirement system members who return on or after July 1, 2017 to covered employment in the system from which they retired. a. Members who return for less than 480 hours in a calendar year: i. May not become an active member in the system; and ii. Are subject to a $1 reduction in their retirement benefit for each $3 earned in excess of $5,000 in the calendar year. b. Members who return for 480 or more hours in a calendar year: i. Must become an active member of the system; ii. Will stop receiving a retirement benefit from the system; and iii. Will be eligible for a second retirement benefit if they earn 5 or more years of service credit through their second employment. c. Employee, employer and state contributions, if any, apply as follows: i. Employer contributions and state contributions (if any) must be paid on all working retirees; ii. Employee contributions must be paid on working retirees who return to covered employment for 480 or more hours in a calendar year. Second Retirement Benefit – for FURS Applies to retirement system members who return on or after July 1, 2017 to active service covered by the system from which they retired. a. If the member works more than 480 hours in a calendar year and accumulates less than 5 years of service credit before terminating again, the member: i. Is not awarded service credit for the period of reemployment; ii. Is refunded the accumulated contributions associated with the period of reemployment; iii. Starting the first month following termination of service, receives the same retirement benefit previously paid to the member; and iv. Does not accrue post-retirement benefit adjustments during the term of reemployment but receives a Guaranteed Annual Benefit Adjustment (GABA) in January immediately following second retirement. 439 125 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION - PENSION PLAN CHANGES (CONTINUED) Year Ended June 30, 2022 CHANGE OF BENEFIT TERMS (CONTINUED) 2017 Legislative Changes – FURS (Continued): Working Retiree Limitations – for FURS (Continued) Second Retirement Benefit – for FURS (Continued) Applies to retirement system members who return on or after July 1, 2017 to active service covered by the system from which they retired. b. If the member works more than 480 hours in a calendar year and accumulates at least 5 years of service credit before terminating again, the member: i. Is awarded service credit for the period of reemployment; ii. Starting the first month following termination of service, receives: 1. The same retirement benefit previously paid to the member, and 2. A second retirement benefit for the period of reemployment calculated based on the laws in effect as of the member’s rehire date; and iii. Does not accrue post-retirement benefit adjustments during the term of reemployment but receives a GABA: 1. On the initial retirement benefit in January immediately following second retirement, and 2. On the second retirement benefit starting in January after receiving that benefit for at least 12 months. c. A member who returns to covered service is not eligible for a disability benefit Refunds • Terminating members eligible to retire may, in lieu of receiving a monthly retirement benefit, refund their accumulated contributions in a lump sum. • Terminating members with accumulated contributions between $200 and $1,000 who wish to rollover their refund must do so within 90 days of termination of service. • Trusts, estates, and charitable organizations listed as beneficiaries are entitled to receive only a lump-sum payment. Interest Credited to Member Accounts • Effective July 1, 2017, the interest rate credited to member accounts increased from 0.25% to 0.77% Lump-Sum Payouts • Effective July 1, 2017, lump-sum payouts in all systems are limited to the member’s accumulated contributions rate than the present value of the member’s benefit. 440 126 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION - PENSION PLAN CHANGES (CONTINUED) Year Ended June 30, 2022 CHANGE OF BENEFIT TERMS (CONTINUED) 2017 Legislative Changes – MPORS: Working Retiree Limitations – for MPORS Applies to retirement system members who return on or after July 1, 2017 to covered employment in the system from which they retired. • Members who return for less than 480 hours in a calendar year: a. May not become an active member in the system; and b. Are subject to a $1 reduction in their retirement benefit for each $3 earned in excess of $5,000 in the calendar year. • Members who return for 480 or more hours in a calendar year: a. Must become an active member of the system; b. Will stop receiving a retirement benefit from the system; and c. Will be eligible for a second retirement benefit if they earn 5 or more years of service credit through their second employment. • Employee, employer and state contributions, if any, apply as follows: a. Employer contributions and state contributions (if any) must be paid on all working retirees; b. Employee contributions must be paid on working retirees who return to covered employment for 480 or more hours in a calendar year. Second Retirement Benefit – for MPORS Applies to retirement system members who return on or after July 1, 2017 to active service covered by the system from which they retired. • If the member works more than 480 hours in a calendar year and accumulates less than 5 years of service credit before terminating again, the member: a. Is not awarded service credit for the period of reemployment; b. Is refunded the accumulated contributions associated with the period of reemployment; c. Starting the first month following termination of service, receives the same retirement benefit previously paid to the member; and d. Does not accrue post-retirement benefit adjustments during the term of reemployment but receives a Guaranteed Annual Benefit Adjustment (GABA) in January immediately following second retirement. 441 127 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION - PENSION PLAN CHANGES (CONTINUED) Year Ended June 30, 2022 CHANGE OF BENEFIT TERMS (CONTINUED) 2017 Legislative Changes – MPORS (Continued): Second Retirement Benefit – for MPORS (Continued) 2017 Legislative Changes: • If the member works more than 480 hours in a calendar year and accumulates at least 5 years of service credit before terminating again, the member: a. Is awarded service credit for the period of reemployment; b. Starting the first month following termination of service, receives: i. The same retirement benefit previously paid to the member, and ii. A second retirement benefit for the period of reemployment calculated based on the laws in effect as of the member’s rehire date; and c. Does not accrue post-retirement benefit adjustments during the term of reemployment but receives a GABA: i. On the initial retirement benefit in January immediately following second retirement, and ii. On the second retirement benefit starting in January after receiving that benefit for at least 12 months. • A member who returns to covered service is not eligible for a disability benefit. Refunds • Terminating members eligible to retire may, in lieu of receiving a monthly retirement benefit, refund their accumulated contributions in a lump sum. • Terminating members with accumulated contributions between $200 and $1,000 who wish to rollover their refund must do so within 90 days of termination of service. • Trusts, estates, and charitable organizations listed as beneficiaries are entitled to receive only a lump-sum payment. Interest Credited to Member Accounts • Effective July 1, 2017, the interest rate credited to member accounts increased from 0.25% to 0.77% Lump-sum payouts • Effective July 1, 2017, lump-sum payouts in all systems are limited to the member’s accumulated contributions rate than the present value of the member’s benefit. 442 128 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION - PENSION PLAN CHANGES (CONTINUED) Year Ended June 30, 2022 CHANGES IN ACTUARIAL ASSUMPTIONS AND METHODS Method and Assumptions used in Calculations of Actuarially Determined Contributions The following Actuarial Assumptions were adopted from the June 30, 2020 actuarial valuation: PERS FURS MPORS General Wage Growth* 3.50% 3.50% 3.50% Investment Rate of Return* 7.65% 7.65% 7.65% *Includes inflation at 2.75% 2.75% 2.75% Merit increase 0% to 6.8.47% 0% to 6.30% 0% to 6.60% Asset valuation method Four-year smoothed market 4-year smoothed market 4-year smoothed market Actuarial cost method Entry age normal Entry age normal Entry age normal Amortization method Level percentage of payroll, open Level percentage of pay, open Level percentage of pay, open Mortality (Healthy members) For Males & Females: RP 2000 Combined Employee and Annuitant Mortality Table projected to 2020 using Scale BB, males set back 1 year For Males & Females: RP 2000 Combined Employee and Annuitant Mortality Table projected to 2020 using Scale BB, males set back 1 year For Males & Females: RP 2000 Combined Employee and Annuitant Mortality Table projected to 2020 using Scale BB, males set back 1 year Mortality (Disabled members) For Males & Females: RP 2000 Combined Mortality Table, with no projections For Males & Females: RP 2000 Combined Mortality Table For Males & Females: RP 2000 Combined Mortality Table Admin Expense as a % of Payroll 0.28% 0.17% 0.18% Administrative expenses are recognized by an additional amount added to the normal cost contribution rate for the System. This amount varies from year to year based on the prior year’s actual administrative expenses. The actuarial assumptions and methods utilized in the June 30, 2020 valuation, were developed in the six year experience study for the period ending 2016. 443 129 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA SCHEDULE OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES - BUDGET TO ACTUAL – GENERAL FUND Year Ended June 30, 2022 Variance with Actual Final Budget Original Final Amounts Positive (Negative) Budgetary fund balance, July 1 (841,840)$ 914,230$ 6,493,277$ 5,579,047$ Resources (inflows): Taxes 17,919,638 17,919,638 18,023,178 103,540 Special assessments - - 931 931 Licenses and permits 364,300 364,300 420,415 56,115 Intergovernmental 8,848,932 8,848,932 8,816,807 (32,125) Charges for services 4,111,159 4,111,159 4,523,191 412,032 Fines and forfeitures 1,062,000 1,062,000 993,493 (68,507) Sale of assets 5,000 5,000 22,321 17,321 Interest on investments 80,000 80,000 36,552 (43,448) Increase (decrease) in fair market value of investments - - (289,699) (289,699) Transfers from other funds 3,709,677 6,896,650 4,966,165 (1,930,485) Issuance of lease (as lessee)- - 19,833 19,833 Other 294,626 294,626 139,623 (155,003) Amounts available for appropriation 35,553,492 40,496,535 44,166,087 3,669,552 Charges to appropriations (outflows): Current General government 9,736,605 9,779,017 9,140,826 638,191 Public safety 18,984,481 18,984,481 18,305,074 679,407 Public service - - 1,434 (1,434) Public welfare 6,293,992 6,448,397 5,274,990 1,173,407 Other 1,543,457 2,110,457 2,022,115 88,342 Capital outlay 1,341,051 1,984,006 565,483 1,418,523 Debt service 52,292 52,292 47,807 4,485 Transfers to other funds 799,025 3,985,998 3,363,753 622,245 Total charges to appropriations 38,750,903 43,344,648 38,721,482 4,623,166 Budgetary fund balance, June 30 (3,197,411)$ (2,848,113)$ 5,444,605$ 8,292,718$ Budgeted Amounts 444 130 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA SCHEDULE OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES - BUDGET TO ACTUAL AMERICA RESCUE PLAN ACT SPECIAL REVENUE FUND Year Ended June 30, 2022 Variance with Final Budget Original Final Actual Amounts Positive (Negative) Budgetary fund balance, July 1 (3,075,100)$ (6,798,100)$ -$ 6,798,100$ Resources (inflows): Taxes - - - - Special assessments - - - - Licenses and permits - - - - Intergovernmental 6,032,500 6,032,500 1,013,635 (5,018,865) Charges for services - - - - Fines and forfeitures - - - - Interest on investments - - 8,368 8,368 Increase (decrease) in fair market value of investments - - (206,290) (206,290) Transfers from other funds - - - - Proceeds from long-term debt - - - - Premium on bonds issued - - - - Proceeds from the sale of capital assets - - - - Other - - - - Amounts available for appropriation 2,957,400 (765,600) 815,713 1,581,313 Charges to appropriations (outflows): Current General government - - - - Public safety - - - - Public service - - - - Public welfare - - - - Other 600,000 600,000 39,255 560,745 Capital outlay - - - - Debt service - - - - Transfers to other funds 11,217,620 11,217,620 974,380 10,243,240 Total charges to appropriations 11,817,620 11,817,620 1,013,635 10,803,985 Budgetary fund balance, June 30 (8,860,220)$ (12,583,220)$ (197,922)$ 12,385,298$ Budgeted Amounts 445 131 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA SCHEDULE OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES - BUDGET TO ACTUAL STREET IMPACT FEE SPECIAL REVENUE FUND Year Ended June 30, 2022 Variance with Final Budget Original Final Actual Amounts Positive (Negative) Budgetary fund balance, July 1 -$ -$ 8,005,408$ 8,005,408$ Resources (inflows): Taxes - - - - Special assessments - - - - Licenses and permits - - - - Intergovernmental - - - - Charges for services 5,727,830 5,727,830 8,426,720 2,698,890 Fines and forfeitures - - - - Interest on investments 60,000 60,000 60,965 965 Increase (decrease) in fair market value of investments - - (436,464) (436,464) Transfers from other funds - - - - Proceeds from long-term debt - - - - Premium on bonds issued - - - - Proceeds from the sale of capital assets - - - - Other 1,000 1,000 387,666 386,666 Amounts available for appropriation 5,788,830 5,788,830 16,444,295 10,655,465 Charges to appropriations (outflows): Current General government - - - - Public safety - - - - Public service 343,392 343,392 545,681 (202,289) Public welfare - - - - Other - - - - Capital outlay 3,600,000 15,773,107 2,679,742 13,093,365 Debt service - - - - Transfers to other funds - - - - Total charges to appropriations 3,943,392 16,116,499 3,225,423 12,891,076 Budgetary fund balance, June 30 1,845,438$ (10,327,669)$ 13,218,872$ 23,546,541$ Budgeted Amounts 446 132 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION – BUDGETARY INFORMATION Year Ended June 30, 2022 General American Rescue Street Impact Fund Plan Act Fees Sources/inflows of resources Actual amounts (budgetary basis) "available for appropriation" from the budgetary comparison schedule 44,166,087$ 815,713$ 16,444,295$ Differences - budget to GAAP: The fund balance at the beginning of the year is a budgetary resource but is not a current-year revenue for financial reporting purposes.(6,493,277) - (8,005,408) Transfers from other funds are inflows of budgetary resources but are not revenues for financial reporting purposes (4,966,165) - - The proceeds from the issuance of long-term debt or a lease are a budgetary resource but are a other financing source for financial reporting purposes (19,833) - - The proceeds from the sale of assets are budgetary resources but are regarded as a special item, rather than revenue, for financial reporting purposes (22,321) - - Total revenues as reported on the statement of revenues, expenditures, and changes in fund balances - governmental funds 32,664,491$ 815,713$ 8,438,887$ Uses/outflows of resources Actual amounts (budgetary basis) "total charges to appropriations" from the budgetary comparison schedule 38,721,482$ 1,013,635$ 3,225,423$ Differences - budget to GAAP: Transfers to other funds are outflows of budgetary resources but are not expenditures for financial reporting purposes.(3,363,753) (974,380) - Total expenditures as reported on the statement of revenues, expenditures, and changes in fund balances - governmental funds 35,357,729$ 39,255$ 3,225,423$ 447 D. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION 448 COMBINING AND INDIVIDUAL FUND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SCHEDULES 449 NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS Departmental Special Revenues – Accounts for monies received and expended for projects relating to various City departments. Street Maintenance – This special revenue fund accounts for special assessment revenues levied, received, and expended for street maintenance provided to specific property owners. Fire Impact Fees Special Revenues – Accounts for the collection and expenditures associated with the fire impact fees. City Planning Board – Accounts for monies received from various sources including property taxes, fees, and County revenues. Expenditures are for short-term and long-term planning of City and adjacent County zones. Section 76-1-102 MCA provides that the purpose of City planning is to encourage local governments to improve the present health, safety, convenience, and welfare of the citizens. Health-Medical Insurance – Accounts for property tax revenues received and transferred to the general fund for premiums and deductibles on group insurance coverage for City employees. Gas Tax Apportionment – Accounts for revenues from State gasoline taxes apportioned from the State of Montana Department of Highways. Drug Forfeitures – Accounts for monies received from fines and forfeitures of drug-related criminal prosecution, to be expended on drug law enforcement and education. City-County Drug Forfeitures – Accounts for monies received from fines and forfeitures of drug-related criminal prosecution, from an inter-local agreement with the County, to be expended on drug law enforcement and education. Victim/Witness Advocate – Accounts for monies collected through the Court system to assist with Victim and Witness Advocate Program. Tree Maintenance – Accounts for special assessment revenues levied, received, and expended for tree maintenance provided to specific property owners. Parks and Trails District Fund: – In May 2020, the Citizens of Bozeman approved the creation of a Parks and Trails District. This fund accounts for the special assessment and rental revenues collected, and the operating and capital expenditures required to manage and maintain citywide parks and trails. Community Transportation – Accounts for federal funding for highways, mass transit, and alternative transportation programs as defined by the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA). Money is distributed on a per-capita basis. Fire Department Equipment– Accounts for Public Safety mill levy tax revenues for fire department capital and equipment. Economic Development Revolving Loan Fund – Accounts for revenues received and expended relative to loans made in accordance with the Community Development Block Grant Program, for economic development purposes. Housing Revolving Loan Fund – Accounts for revenues received and expended relative to loans made in accordance with the Community Development Block Grant Program, for housing development purposes. Community Housing – Accounts for money set aside by the City Commission and related expenditure for the establishment of safe, decent, and affordable housing for low and moderate-income citizens. 450 SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS (CONTINUED) TIF Downtown Improvement District – In November 1995, the City adopted an Urban Renewal Plan for the downtown area. This fund accounts for the revenue and expenditures associated with this tax increment financing district and associated business improvement district. Pole Yard TIF – In November 2020, the City created a tax increment financing district to eliminate conditions that contribute to blight substantially impairing sound growth of the City through investments in public infrastructure and efficient delivery of public services. The fund accounts for the revenue and expenditures associated with the district. Building Inspection Fund – Accounts for all activity related to enforcing the building regulation adopted by the City. It includes all the money and staff associated with executing any aspect of the code enforcement program. Street Arterial & Collector District – Accounts for special assessment revenues levied, received, and expended for necessary transportation infrastructure. Street Lighting – Accounts for special assessment revenues levied, received, and expended for street and public highway lighting provided to specific property owners. Park Land – Accounts for monies donated for the purpose of acquiring and developing City Parks. Municipal Court Restitution – Accounts for checks that were canceled on the restitution checking account, per MCA 46-18-250. TIF N.E. Urban Renewal – In August of 2005, the City created an Urban Renewal Plan for the Northeast Urban section of Bozeman. This fund accounts for the revenue and expenditures associated with the district. TIF N 7th Corridor - In August of 2005, the City created a Renewal Plan for the North 7th Avenue business district. This fund accounts for the revenue and expenditures associated with the district. TIF Mandeville/Wheat Dr. – In December 2006, the City created a tax increment financing district to encourage the attraction and retention of value-adding farming industries. This fund accounts for the revenue and expenditures associated with the district. TIF South Bozeman Technology – In December 2012, the City created a tax increment financing district to improve existing infrastructure deficiencies on property adjacent to Montana State University and the Innovation Campus. This fund accounts for the revenue and expenditures associated with the district. DEBT SERVICE FUNDS Special Improvement District (SID) Revolving – Accounts for property tax revenues received and expended for the payment of special improvement district bond principal and interest. General Obligation Bonds Debt Service Fund – Accounts for the debt service payments associated with the Library and Transportation general obligation bonds. Tax Increment Financing Bonds Debt Service Fund – Accounts for the debt service payments associated with the Tax Increment Urban Renewal Revenue Bonds issued as partial funding for the construction of a Downtown Intermodal Parking Facility. 451 PERMANENT FUNDS Perpetual Cemetery Care – Accounts for 15% maintenance fee received from the sale of City cemetery plots, which is to be used for perpetual care. The interest income from the trust is transferred to the general fund for use in maintaining the City’s cemetery. 452 133 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA COMBINING BALANCE SHEET NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS June 30, 2022 City Street Planning Health-Medical Gas Tax Maintenance Departmental Board Insurance Apportionment ASSETS Cash and cash equivalents 2,246,807$ 2,210,433$ 658,528$ 840,504$ 1,162,164$ Receivables: Property taxes - 10,717 21,963 188,876 - Accrued interest 2,702 2,243 - 1,015 1,408 Customers, net 2,242 740 113 - - Special assessments 105,946 - - - - Other governments - 1,246 - - - Advances to other city funds - - - - - Prepaid expenditures - 235,875 - - - Notes receivable - - - - - Restricted cash and cash equivalents - 25,000 106,596 - - Total assets 2,357,697$ 2,486,254$ 787,200$ 1,030,395$ 1,163,572$ LIABILITIES Accounts payable 315,805$ 134,022$ 43,402$ -$ 101,447$ Escheat property payable 678 - - - - Accrued employee benefits payable - - 222 - - Due to other funds - - - - - Total liabilities 316,483 134,022 43,624 - 101,447 DEFERRED INFLOWS OF RESOURCES Unavailable revenue-property taxes - 275 549 5,101 - Unavailable revenue-special assessments 77,224 - - - - Total deferred inflows of resources 77,224 275 549 5,101 - FUND BALANCES Nonspendable - 235,875 - - - Restricted 1,963,990 206,886 743,027 1,025,294 1,062,125 Committed - 1,889,319 - - - Assigned - 134,135 - - - Unassigned - (114,258) - - - Total fund balances 1,963,990 2,351,957 743,027 1,025,294 1,062,125 Total liabilities, deferred inflows of resources, and fund balances 2,357,697$ 2,486,254$ 787,200$ 1,030,395$ 1,163,572$ (continued) Special Revenue Funds 453 134 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA COMBINING BALANCE SHEET NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 Downtown Building Economic Tree Fire Improvement Inspection Development Maintenance Impact Fees District Fund Revolving Loan ASSETS Cash and cash equivalents 676,785$ -$ 6,509,329$ 1,527,346$ -$ Receivables: Property taxes - - 265,175 - - Accrued interest 819 5,224 7,926 1,867 - Customers, net - - - - 643,970 Special assessments 10,338 - 3,022 - - Other governments - - - - - Advances to other city funds - - - - - Prepaid expenditures - - - - - Notes receivable - - - - 381,056 Restricted cash and cash equivalents - 4,282,688 - - - Total assets 687,942$ 4,287,912$ 6,785,452$ 1,529,213$ 1,025,026$ LIABILITIES Accounts payable 18,495$ 745$ 3,009,833$ 118,610$ -$ Escheat property payable - - - - - Accrued employee benefits payable - - - 887 - Due to other funds - - - - - Total liabilities 18,495 745 3,009,833 119,497 - DEFERRED INFLOWS OF RESOURCES Unavailable revenue-property taxes - - - - - Unavailable revenue-special assessments 9,100 - - - - Total deferred inflows of resources 9,100 - - - - FUND BALANCES Nonspendable - - - - - Restricted 660,347 4,287,167 3,775,619 1,409,716 1,025,026 Committed - - - - - Assigned - - - - - Unassigned - - - - - Total fund balances 660,347 4,287,167 3,775,619 1,409,716 1,025,026 Total liabilities, deferred inflows of resources, and fund balances 687,942$ 4,287,912$ 6,785,452$ 1,529,213$ 1,025,026$ (continued) Special Revenue Funds 454 135 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA COMBINING BALANCE SHEET NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 Special Revenue Funds Street Arterial Community and Collector TIF TIF N.E. Housing District N 7th Corridor Urban Renewal ASSETS Cash and cash equivalents 699,304$ 3,875,428$ 2,150,843$ 718,534$ Receivables: Property taxes 53,303 - 137,045 43,386 Accrued interest 852 4,716 2,620 868 Customers, net - - - - Special assessments - 19,458 - - Other governments - - - - Advances to other city funds - - - - Prepaid expenditures - - - - Notes receivable 22,499 - - - Restricted cash and cash equivalents - - - 92,000 Total assets 775,958$ 3,899,602$ 2,290,508$ 854,788$ LIABILITIES Accounts payable 537,324$ 46,855$ 365,133$ 1,830$ Escheat property payable - - - - Accrued employee benefits payable - - - - Due to other funds - - - - Total liabilities 537,324 46,855 365,133 1,830 DEFERRED INFLOWS OF RESOURCES Unavailable revenue-property taxes 1,298 - 12,421 - Unavailable revenue-special assessments - - - - Total deferred inflows of resources 1,298 - 12,421 - FUND BALANCES Nonspendable - - - - Restricted - 3,852,747 1,912,954 852,958 Committed 237,336 - - - Assigned - - - - Unassigned - - - - Total fund balances 237,336 3,852,747 1,912,954 852,958 Total liabilities, deferred inflows of resources, and fund balances 775,958$ 3,899,602$ 2,290,508$ 854,788$ (continued) 455 136 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA COMBINING BALANCE SHEET NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 Special Revenue Funds TIF Mandeville/TIFD South Boz Victim/Witness Fire Department Street Wheat Dr.Technology Advocate Equipment Lighting ASSETS Cash and cash equivalents 134,594$ 7,899$ 421,238$ 999,769$ 514,631$ Receivables: Property taxes 8,516 15,840 - 42,382 - Accrued interest 164 - 508 1,212 - Customers, net - - 5,522 - - Special assessments - - - - 8,430 Other governments - - - - - Advances to other city funds - - - - - Prepaid expenditures - - - - - Notes receivable - - - - - Restricted cash and cash equivalents - - - - - Total assets 143,274$ 23,739$ 427,268$ 1,043,363$ 523,061$ LIABILITIES Accounts payable -$ -$ 26,081$ -$ 24,670$ Escheat property payable - - - - - Accrued employee benefits payable - - - - - Due to other funds - - - - - Total liabilities - - 26,081 - 24,670 DEFERRED INFLOWS OF RESOURCES Unavailable revenue-property taxes - - - 1,091 - Unavailable revenue-special assessments - - - - - Total deferred inflows of resources - - - 1,091 - FUND BALANCES Nonspendable - - - - - Restricted 143,274 23,739 401,187 - 498,391 Committed - - - 1,042,272 - Assigned - - - - - Unassigned - - - - - Total fund balances 143,274 23,739 401,187 1,042,272 498,391 Total liabilities, deferred inflows of resources, and fund balances 143,274$ 23,739$ 427,268$ 1,043,363$ 523,061$ (continued) 456 137 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA COMBINING BALANCE SHEET NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 Parks and Park Municipal Court Trails Pole Yard Land Restitution District TIF Total ASSETS Cash and cash equivalents 1,250,374$ 24,933$ 2,444,552$ 130,605$ 29,204,600$ Receivables: Property taxes - - - 10,391 797,594 Accrued interest 1,523 - 2,980 - 38,647 Customers, net - - - - 652,587 Special assessments - - 62,391 - 209,585 Other governments - - - - 1,246 Advances to other city funds - - - - - Prepaid expenditures - - - - 235,875 Notes receivable - - - - 403,555 Restricted cash and cash equivalents - - - - 4,506,284 Total assets 1,251,897$ 24,933$ 2,509,923$ 140,996$ 36,049,973$ LIABILITIES Accounts payable -$ 1,000$ 626,420$ -$ 5,371,672$ Escheat property payable - 23,828 - - 24,506 Accrued employee benefits payable - - - - 1,109 Due to other funds - - - - - Total liabilities - 24,828 626,420 - 5,397,287 DEFERRED INFLOWS OF RESOURCES Unavailable revenue-property taxes - - - - 20,735 Unavailable revenue-special assessments - - - - 86,324 Total deferred inflows of resources - - - - 107,059 FUND BALANCES Nonspendable - - - - 235,875 Restricted 1,251,897 105 1,883,503 140,996 27,120,948 Committed - - - - 3,168,927 Assigned - - - - 134,135 Unassigned - - - - (114,258) Total fund balances 1,251,897 105 1,883,503 140,996 30,545,627 Total liabilities, deferred inflows of resources, and fund balances 1,251,897$ 24,933$ 2,509,923$ 140,996$ 36,049,973$ (continued) Special Revenue Funds 457 138 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA COMBINING BALANCE SHEET NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 SID G.O.TIF Revolving Bonds Bonds Total ASSETS Cash and cash equivalents 766,881$ 127,854 -$ 894,735$ Receivables: Property taxes - 237,609 - 237,609 Accrued interest 3,390 - - 3,390 Customers, net - - - - Special assessments - - - - Other governments - - - - Advances to other city funds 693,010 - - 693,010 Prepaid expenditures - - - - Notes receivable - - - - Restricted cash and cash equivalents - - - - Total assets 1,463,281$ 365,463$ -$ 1,828,744$ LIABILITIES Accounts payable -$ -$ -$ -$ Escheat property payable - - - - Accrued employee benefits payable - - - - Due to other funds - 311,239 - 311,239 Total liabilities - 311,239 - 311,239 DEFERRED INFLOWS OF RESOURCES Unavailable revenue-property taxes - 6,193 - 6,193 Unavailable revenue-special assessments - - - - Total deferred inflows of resources - 6,193 - 6,193 FUND BALANCES Nonspendable - - - - Restricted 1,463,281 48,031 - 1,511,312 Committed - - - - Assigned - - - - Unassigned - - - - Total fund balances 1,463,281 48,031 - 1,511,312 Total liabilities, deferred inflows of resources, and fund balances 1,463,281$ 365,463$ -$ 1,828,744$ (continued) Debt Service Funds 458 139 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA COMBINING BALANCE SHEET NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 Permanent Total Fund Nonmajor Perpetual Governmental Cemetery Care Funds ASSETS Cash and cash equivalents -$ 30,099,335$ Receivables: Property taxes - 1,035,203 Accrued interest 2,063 44,100 Customers, net 5,241 657,828 Special assessments - 209,585 Other governments - 1,246 Advances to other city funds - 693,010 Prepaid expenditures - 235,875 Notes receivable - 403,555 Restricted cash and cash equivalents 1,696,078 6,202,362 Total assets 1,703,382$ 39,582,099$ LIABILITIES Accounts payable 19,278$ 5,390,950$ Escheat property payable - 24,506 Accrued employee benefits payable - 1,109 Due to other funds - 311,239 Total liabilities 19,278 5,727,804 DEFERRED INFLOWS OF RESOURCES Unavailable revenue-property taxes - 26,928 Unavailable revenue-special assessments - 86,324 Total deferred inflows of resources - 113,252 FUND BALANCES Nonspendable 1,684,104 1,919,979 Restricted - 28,632,260 Committed - 3,168,927 Assigned - 134,135 Unassigned - (114,258) Total fund balances 1,684,104 33,741,043 Total liabilities, deferred inflows of resources, and fund balances 1,703,382$ 39,582,099$ 459 140 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA COMBINING STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES - NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS Year Ended June 30, 2022 City Street Planning Health-Medical Gas Tax Maintenance Departmental Board Insurance Apportionment REVENUES Taxes -$ 155,441$ 309,450$ 2,736,976$ -$ Special assessments 18,159 - - - - Licenses and permits 57,264 - - - - Intergovernmental 29,264 734,164 164,197 - 1,734,520 Charges for services 7,646,055 24,745 1,326,387 - - Fines and forfeitures - - - - - Interest on investments 7,930 9,435 2,909 2,847 5,895 Increase (decrease) in fair market value of investments (66,661) (55,276) - (25,237) (34,893) Interest on loans receivable - - - - - Other 71,633 210,048 46,024 - - Total revenues 7,763,644 1,078,557 1,848,967 2,714,586 1,705,522 EXPENDITURES Current: General government - 143,677 2,532,115 - - Public safety - 409,539 - - - Public service 5,567,166 22 - - 368,709 Public welfare - 604,814 - - - Other - 143,000 - - - Capital outlay 934,572 - 78,459 - 833,018 Debt service: Principal 223,117 65,167 - - - Interest and fiscal fees 17,420 60,628 - - - Total expenditures 6,742,275 1,426,847 2,610,574 - 1,201,727 Revenues over (under) expenditures 1,021,369 (348,290) (761,607) 2,714,586 503,795 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers in - 382,922 188,183 - - Transfers out (738,101) (3,974) - (2,731,045) (975,291) Sale of capital assets 12,450 - - - - Issuance of long term debt - - - - - Total other financing sources (uses)(725,651) 378,948 188,183 (2,731,045) (975,291) Net change in fund balance 295,718 30,658 (573,424) (16,459) (471,496) FUND BALANCES, beginning of year 1,668,272 2,321,299 1,316,451 1,041,753 1,533,621 FUND BALANCES, end of year 1,963,990$ 2,351,957$ 743,027$ 1,025,294$ 1,062,125$ (continued) Special Revenue Funds 460 141 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA COMBINING STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES - NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS (CONTINUED) Year Ended June 30, 2022 Downtown Building Economic Tree Fire Improvement Inspection Development Maintenance Impact Fees District Fund Revolving Loan REVENUES Taxes -$ -$ 1,483,518$ -$ -$ Special assessments 2,228 - 185,334 - - Licenses and permits - - 1,750 2,370,631 - Intergovernmental 10,924 - 1,303 112,223 - Charges for services 827,942 615,771 - 34 - Fines and forfeitures - - - - - Interest on investments 3,098 19,733 25,380 15,277 72 Increase (decrease) in fair market value of investments (20,322) (128,742) (195,406) (45,850) - Interest on loans receivable - - - - 42,866 Other 28,034 - - - - Total revenues 851,904 506,762 1,501,879 2,452,315 42,938 EXPENDITURES Current: General government - - - - - Public safety - 32,966 - 2,667,747 - Public service - - - - - Public welfare 728,136 - 596,057 - 61,088 Other - - - - - Capital outlay 96,016 - 191,815 157,287 - Debt service: Principal - - - - - Interest and fiscal fees - - - - - Total expenditures 824,152 32,966 787,872 2,825,034 61,088 Revenues over (under) expenditures 27,752 473,796 714,007 (372,719) (18,150) OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers in - - - - 467,027 Transfers out - - (332,372) (20,904) (212,000) Sale of capital assets - - - - - Issuance of long term debt - - - - - Total other financing sources (uses)- - (332,372) (20,904) 255,027 Net change in fund balance 27,752 473,796 381,635 (393,623) 236,877 FUND BALANCES, beginning of year 632,595 3,813,371 3,393,984 1,803,339 788,149 FUND BALANCES, end of year 660,347$ 4,287,167$ 3,775,619$ 1,409,716$ 1,025,026$ (continued) Special Revenue Funds 461 142 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA COMBINING STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES - NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS (CONTINUED) Year Ended June 30, 2022 Special Revenue Funds Street Arterial Community and Collector TIF TIF N.E. Housing District N 7th Corridor Urban Renewal REVENUES Taxes 773,812$ -$ 1,485,671$ 378,117$ Special assessments - 4,146 - - Licenses and permits - - - - Intergovernmental 673 - 699 186 Charges for services - 1,545,607 - - Fines and forfeitures - - - - Interest on investments 3,070 12,954 22,677 3,087 Increase (decrease) in fair market value of investments (20,997) (116,359) (64,621) (21,574) Interest on loans receivable 11 - - - Other - 953,851 - 37,220 Total revenues 756,569 2,400,199 1,444,426 397,036 EXPENDITURES Current: General government - - - - Public safety - - - - Public service - 65,454 - - Public welfare 1,319,599 - 2,312,030 62,370 Other - - - - Capital outlay - 1,942,455 92,559 23,778 Debt service: Principal - - - 40,085 Interest and fiscal fees - - - 51,915 Total expenditures 1,319,599 2,007,909 2,404,589 178,148 Revenues over (under) expenditures (563,030) 392,290 (960,163) 218,888 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers in - 975,291 257,102 - Transfers out - - (410,049) - Sale of capital assets - - - - Issuance of long term debt - - - - Total other financing sources (uses)- 975,291 (152,947) - Net change in fund balance (563,030) 1,367,581 (1,113,110) 218,888 FUND BALANCES, beginning of year 800,366 2,485,166 3,026,064 634,070 FUND BALANCES, end of year 237,336$ 3,852,747$ 1,912,954$ 852,958$ (continued) 462 143 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA COMBINING STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES - NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS (CONTINUED) Year Ended June 30, 2022 Special Revenue Funds TIF Mandeville/TIFD South Boz Victim/Witness Fire Department Street Wheat Dr.Technology Advocate Equipment Lighting REVENUES Taxes 29,469$ 31,320$ -$ 614,723$ -$ Special assessments - - - - 492,037 Licenses and permits - - - - - Intergovernmental - - - - - Charges for services - - - - - Fines and forfeitures - - 59,703 - - Interest on investments 616 30 2,060 3,817 1,732 Increase (decrease) in fair market value of investments (4,043) - (12,649) (30,019) - Interest on loans receivable - - - - - Other - - - - - Total revenues 26,042 31,350 49,114 588,521 493,769 EXPENDITURES Current: General government - - 74,566 - - Public safety - - - - - Public service - - - - 422,391 Public welfare 3,519 - - - - Other - - - - - Capital outlay - - - - - Debt service: Principal - - - - - Interest and fiscal fees - - - - - Total expenditures 3,519 - 74,566 - 422,391 Revenues over (under) expenditures 22,523 31,350 (25,452) 588,521 71,378 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers in - - - - - Transfers out - - - (102,478) - Sale of capital assets - - - - - Issuance of long term debt - - - - - Total other financing sources (uses)- - - (102,478) - Net change in fund balance 22,523 31,350 (25,452) 486,043 71,378 FUND BALANCES, beginning of year 120,751 (7,611) 426,639 556,229 427,013 FUND BALANCES, end of year 143,274$ 23,739$ 401,187$ 1,042,272$ 498,391$ (continued) 463 144 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA COMBINING STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES - NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS (CONTINUED) Year Ended June 30, 2022 Municipal Parks and Park Court Trails Pole Yard Land Restitution District TIF Totals REVENUES Taxes -$ -$ -$ 140,996$ 8,139,493$ Special assessments - - 12,000 - 713,904 Licenses and permits - - - - 2,429,645 Intergovernmental - - 20,087 - 2,808,240 Charges for services - - 5,059,628 - 17,046,169 Fines and forfeitures - - - - 59,703 Interest on investments 5,992 - 8,207 - 156,818 Increase (decrease) in fair market value of investments (37,543) - (73,397) - (953,589) Interest on loans receivable - - - - 42,877 Other 736,510 - 100,496 - 2,183,816 Total revenues 704,959 - 5,127,021 140,996 32,627,076 EXPENDITURES Current: General government - - - - 2,750,358 Public safety - - - - 3,110,252 Public service - - - - 6,423,742 Public welfare 3,450 - 3,630,385 - 9,321,448 Other - - - - 143,000 Capital outlay 1,055,753 - 450,167 - 5,855,879 Debt service: Principal - - - - 328,369 Interest and fiscal fees - - - - 129,963 Total expenditures 1,059,203 - 4,080,552 - 28,063,011 Revenues over (under) expenditures (354,244) - 1,046,469 140,996 4,564,065 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers in - - - - 2,270,525 Transfers out - - - - (5,526,214) Sale of capital assets - - 65 - 12,515 Issuance of long term debt 315,000 - - - 315,000 Total other financing sources (uses)315,000 - 65 - (2,928,174) Net change in fund balance (39,244) - 1,046,534 140,996 1,635,891 FUND BALANCES, beginning of year 1,291,141 105 836,969 - 28,909,736 FUND BALANCES, end of year 1,251,897$ 105$ 1,883,503$ 140,996$ 30,545,627$ (continued) Special Revenue Funds 464 145 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA COMBINING STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES - NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS (CONTINUED) Year Ended June 30, 2022 SID G.O.TIF Revolving Bonds Bonds Totals REVENUES Taxes -$ 3,444,526$ -$ 3,444,526$ Special assessments - - - - Licenses and permits - - - - Intergovernmental - - - - Charges for services - - - - Fines and forfeitures - - - - Interest on investments 12,553 1,814 - 14,367 Increase (decrease) in fair market value of investments (83,550) - - (83,550) Interest on loans receivable 10,662 - - 10,662 Other - - - - Total revenues (60,335) 3,446,340 - 3,386,005 EXPENDITURES Current: General government - - - - Public safety - - - - Public service - - - - Public welfare - - - - Other - - - - Capital outlay - - - - Debt service: Principal - 1,980,000 435,000 2,415,000 Interest and fiscal fees - 1,474,088 305,922 1,780,010 Total expenditures - 3,454,088 740,922 4,195,010 Revenues over (under) expenditures (60,335) (7,748) (740,922) (809,005) OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers in - - 742,421 742,421 Transfers out (2,077,709) - - (2,077,709) Sale of capital assets - - - - Issuance of long term debt - - - - Total other financing sources (uses)(2,077,709) - 742,421 (1,335,288) Net change in fund balance (2,138,044) (7,748) 1,499 (2,144,293) FUND BALANCES, beginning of year 3,601,325 55,779 (1,499) 3,655,605 FUND BALANCES, end of year 1,463,281$ 48,031$ -$ 1,511,312$ (continued) Debt Service Funds 465 146 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA COMBINING STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES - NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS (CONTINUED) Year Ended June 30, 2022 Permanent Total Fund Nonmajor Cemetery Governmental Perpetual Care Funds REVENUES Taxes -$ 11,584,019$ Special assessments - 713,904 Licenses and permits - 2,429,645 Intergovernmental - 2,808,240 Charges for services 97,453 17,143,622 Fines and forfeitures - 59,703 Interest on investments 8,094 179,279 Increase (decrease) in fair market value of investments (50,922) (1,088,061) Interest on loans receivable - 53,539 Other - 2,183,816 Total revenues 54,625 36,067,706 EXPENDITURES Current: General government - 2,750,358 Public safety - 3,110,252 Public service - 6,423,742 Public welfare - 9,321,448 Other - 143,000 Capital outlay - 5,855,879 Debt service: Principal - 2,743,369 Interest and fiscal fees - 1,909,973 Total expenditures - 32,258,021 Revenues over (under) expenditures 54,625 3,809,685 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers in - 3,012,946 Transfers out - (7,603,923) Sale of capital assets - 12,515 Issuance of long term debt - 315,000 Total other financing sources (uses)- (4,263,462) Net change in fund balance 54,625 (453,777) FUND BALANCES, beginning of year 1,629,479 34,194,820 FUND BALANCES, end of year 1,684,104$ 33,741,043$ 466 147 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA SCHEDULES OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES – BUDGET TO ACTUAL SID DEBT SERVICE Year Ended June 30, 2022 Variance Positive Budget Actual (Negative) REVENUES Taxes -$ -$ -$ Special assessments 473,008 901,483 428,475 Licenses and permits - - - Intergovernmental - - - Charges for services - 1,704 1,704 Fines and forfeitures - - - Interest on investments 28,345 14,046 (14,299) Increase (decrease) in fair market value of investments - (78,498) (78,498) Loan repayment - - - Other - 1,789 1,789 Total revenues 501,353 840,524 339,171 EXPENDITURES - BUDGET UNIT 321,932 319,135 2,797 Revenues over (under) expenditures 179,421 521,389 341,968 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers in 3,186,973 2,077,709 (1,109,264) Transfers out - - - Long-term debt issued - - - Sale of capital assets - - - Total other financing sources (uses)3,186,973 2,077,709 (1,109,264) Revenues and other sources over (under) expenditures 3,366,394$ 2,599,098 (767,296)$ FUND BALANCES, beginning of year 1,804,144 FUND BALANCES, end of year 4,403,242$ SID Debt Service 467 148 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA SCHEDULES OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES – BUDGET TO ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION CAPITAL PROJECTS Year Ended June 30, 2022 Variance Positive Budget Actual (Negative) REVENUES Taxes -$ -$ -$ Special assessments - - - Licenses and permits - - - Intergovernmental - - - Charges for services - - - Fines and forfeitures - - - Interest on investments 84,000 153,158 69,158 Increase (decrease) in fair market value of investments - (238,877) (238,877) Loan repayment - - - Other 4,144,000 - (4,144,000) Total revenues 4,228,000 (85,719) (4,313,719) EXPENDITURES - BUDGET UNIT 31,205,954 22,398,385 8,807,569 Revenues over (under) expenditures (26,977,954) (22,484,104) 4,493,850 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers in 2,850,825 745,362 (2,105,463) Transfers out - (257,102) (257,102) Long-term debt issued - 7,245,591 7,245,591 Sale of capital assets - - - Total other financing sources (uses)2,850,825 7,733,851 4,883,026 Revenues and other sources over (under) expenditures (24,127,129)$ (14,750,253) 9,376,876$ FUND BALANCES, beginning of year 24,078,408 FUND BALANCES, end of year 9,328,155$ Construction Capital Projects 468 149 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA SCHEDULES OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES – BUDGET TO ACTUAL NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS Year Ended June 30, 2022 Variance Variance Positive Positive Budget Actual (Negative) Budget Actual (Negative) REVENUES Taxes -$ -$ -$ 129,408$ 155,441$ 26,033$ Special assessments 21,100 18,159 (2,941) - - - Licenses and permits 18,000 57,264 39,264 - - - Intergovernmental - 29,264 29,264 495,735 734,164 238,429 Charges for services 7,041,170 7,646,055 604,885 10,000 24,745 14,745 Fines and forfeitures - - - 67,000 - (67,000) Interest on investments 11,000 7,930 (3,070) 21,175 9,435 (11,740) Increase (decrease) in fair market value of investments - (66,661) (66,661) - (55,276) (55,276) Loan repayment - - - 250 - (250) Other 25,000 71,633 46,633 103,200 210,048 106,848 Total revenues 7,116,270 7,763,644 647,374 826,768 1,078,557 251,789 EXPENDITURES - BUDGET UNIT 8,059,112 6,742,275 1,316,837 1,180,236 1,426,847 (246,611) Revenues over (under) expenditures (942,842) 1,021,369 1,964,211 (353,468) (348,290) 5,178 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers in - - - 494,039 382,922 (111,117) Transfers out (738,101) (738,101) - - (3,974) (3,974) Long-term debt issued - - - - - - Sale of capital assets - 12,450 12,450 - - - Total other financing sources (uses)(738,101) (725,651) 12,450 494,039 378,948 (115,091) Revenues and other sources over (under) expenditures (1,680,943)$ 295,718 1,976,661$ 140,571$ 30,658 (109,913)$ FUND BALANCES, beginning of year 1,668,272 2,321,299 FUND BALANCES, end of year 1,963,990$ 2,351,957$ (continued) Special Revenue Funds Street Maintenance Departmental Special Revenues 469 150 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA SCHEDULES OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES – BUDGET TO ACTUAL NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS (CONTINUED) Year Ended June 30, 2022 Variance Variance Positive Positive Budget Actual (Negative) Budget Actual (Negative) REVENUES Taxes 286,198$ 309,450$ 23,252$ 2,743,208$ 2,736,976$ (6,232)$ Special assessments - - - - - - Licenses and permits - - - - - - Intergovernmental 118,081 164,197 46,116 - - - Charges for services 1,708,575 1,326,387 (382,188) - - - Fines and forfeitures - - - - - - Interest on investments 10,000 2,909 (7,091) - 2,847 2,847 Increase (decrease) in fair market value of investments - - - - (25,237) (25,237) Loan repayment - - - - - - Other 50,500 46,024 (4,476) - - - Total revenues 2,173,354 1,848,967 (324,387) 2,743,208 2,714,586 (28,622) EXPENDITURES - BUDGET UNIT 3,383,246 2,610,574 772,672 - - - Revenues over (under) expenditures (1,209,892) (761,607) 448,285 2,743,208 2,714,586 (28,622) OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers in 243,930 188,183 (55,747) - - - Transfers out - - - (3,017,449) (2,731,045) 286,404 Long-term debt issued - - - - - - Sale of capital assets - - - - - - Total other financing sources (uses)243,930 188,183 (55,747) (3,017,449) (2,731,045) 286,404 Revenues and other sources over (under) expenditures (965,962)$ (573,424) 392,538$ (274,241)$ (16,459) 257,782$ FUND BALANCES, beginning of year 1,316,451 1,041,753 FUND BALANCES, end of year 743,027$ 1,025,294$ (continued) City Planning Board Health-Medical Insurance Special Revenue Funds 470 151 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA SCHEDULES OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES – BUDGET TO ACTUAL NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS (CONTINUED) Year Ended June 30, 2022 Variance Variance Positive Positive Budget Actual (Negative) Budget Actual (Negative) REVENUES Taxes -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Special assessments - - - 2,000 2,228 228 Licenses and permits - - - - - - Intergovernmental 1,420,000 1,734,520 314,520 - 10,924 10,924 Charges for services - - - 808,366 827,942 19,576 Fines and forfeitures - - - - - - Interest on investments 10,000 5,895 (4,105) 4,000 3,098 (902) Increase (decrease) in fair market value of investments - (34,893) (34,893) - (20,322) (20,322) Loan repayment - - - - - - Other - - - 6,000 28,034 22,034 Total revenues 1,430,000 1,705,522 275,522 820,366 851,904 31,538 EXPENDITURES - BUDGET UNIT 1,884,547 1,201,727 682,820 1,039,280 824,152 215,128 Revenues over (under) expenditures (454,547) 503,795 958,342 (218,914) 27,752 246,666 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers in - - - - - - Transfers out (650,000) (975,291) (325,291) - - - Long-term debt issued - - - - - - Sale of capital assets - - - - - - Total other financing sources (uses)(650,000) (975,291) (325,291) - - - Revenues and other sources over (under) expenditures (1,104,547)$ (471,496) 633,051$ (218,914)$ 27,752 246,666$ FUND BALANCES, beginning of year 1,533,621 632,595 FUND BALANCES, end of year 1,062,125$ 660,347$ (continued) Tree MaintenanceGas Tax Apportionment Special Revenue Funds 471 152 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA SCHEDULES OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES – BUDGET TO ACTUAL NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS (CONTINUED) Year Ended June 30, 2022 Downtown Improvement District Variance Variance Positive Positive Budget Actual (Negative) Budget Actual (Negative) REVENUES Taxes -$ -$ -$ 1,919,863$ 1,483,518$ (436,345)$ Special assessments - - - 185,100 185,334 234 Licenses and permits - - - 2,000 1,750 (250) Intergovernmental - - - 57,059 1,303 (55,756) Charges for services 511,181 615,771 104,590 - - - Fines and forfeitures - - - - - - Interest on investments 20,000 19,733 (267) 20,000 25,380 5,380 Increase (decrease) in fair market value of investments - (128,742) (128,742) - (195,406) (195,406) Loan repayment - - - - - - Other - - - 39,500 - (39,500) Total revenues 531,181 506,762 (24,419) 2,223,522 1,501,879 (721,643) EXPENDITURES - BUDGET UNIT 25,560 32,966 (7,406) 3,342,002 787,872 2,554,130 Revenues over (under) expenditures 505,621 473,796 (31,825) (1,118,480) 714,007 1,832,487 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers in - - - - - - Transfers out - - - (332,448) (332,372) 76 Long-term debt issued - - - - - - Sale of capital assets - - - - - - Total other financing sources (uses)- - - (332,448) (332,372) 76 Revenues and other sources over (under) expenditures 505,621$ 473,796 (31,825)$ (1,450,928)$ 381,635 1,832,563$ FUND BALANCES, beginning of year 3,813,371 3,393,984 FUND BALANCES, end of year 4,287,167$ 3,775,619$ (continued) Special Revenue Funds Fire Impact Fees Special Revenue 472 153 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA SCHEDULES OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES – BUDGET TO ACTUAL NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS (CONTINUED) Year Ended June 30, 2022 Variance Variance Positive Positive Budget Actual (Negative) Budget Actual (Negative) REVENUES Taxes -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Special assessments - - - - - - Licenses and permits 2,213,964 2,370,631 156,667 - - - Intergovernmental - 112,223 112,223 - - - Charges for services 600 34 (566) - - - Fines and forfeitures - - - - - - Interest on investments 20,000 15,277 (4,723) - 72 72 Increase (decrease) in fair market value of investments - (45,850) (45,850) - - - Loan repayment - - - 25,000 42,866 17,866 Other - - - - - - Total revenues 2,234,564 2,452,315 217,751 25,000 42,938 17,938 EXPENDITURES - BUDGET UNIT 2,993,425 2,825,034 168,391 31,000 61,088 (30,088) Revenues over (under) expenditures (758,861) (372,719) 386,142 (6,000) (18,150) (12,150) OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers in - - - - 467,027 467,027 Transfers out - (20,904) (20,904) - (212,000) (212,000) Long-term debt issued - - - - - - Sale of capital assets - - - - - - Total other financing sources (uses)- (20,904) (20,904) - 255,027 255,027 Revenues and other sources over (under) expenditures (758,861)$ (393,623) 365,238$ (6,000)$ 236,877 242,877$ FUND BALANCES, beginning of year 1,803,339 788,149 FUND BALANCES, end of year 1,409,716$ 1,025,026$ (continued) Economic Development Revolving Loan FundBuilding Inspection Fund Special Revenue Funds 473 154 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA SCHEDULES OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES – BUDGET TO ACTUAL NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS (CONTINUED) Year Ended June 30, 2022 Variance Variance Positive Positive Budget Actual (Negative) Budget Actual (Negative) REVENUES Taxes 715,495$ 773,812$ 58,317$ -$ -$ -$ Special assessments - - - - 12,000 12,000 Licenses and permits - - - - - - Intergovernmental - 673 673 - 20,087 20,087 Charges for services - - - 4,652,689 5,059,628 406,939 Fines and forfeitures - - - - - - Interest on investments 5,000 3,070 (1,930) 2,500 8,207 5,707 Increase (decrease) in fair market value of investments - (20,997) (20,997) - (73,397) (73,397) Loan repayment 1,000 11 (989) - - - Other - - - - 100,496 100,496 Total revenues 721,495 756,569 35,074 4,655,189 5,127,021 471,832 EXPENDITURES - BUDGET UNIT 1,367,440 1,319,599 47,841 5,140,522 4,080,552 1,059,970 Revenues over (under) expenditures (645,945) (563,030) 82,915 (485,333) 1,046,469 1,531,802 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers in - - - - - - Transfers out - - - - - - Long-term debt issued - - - - - - Sale of capital assets - - - - 65 65 Total other financing sources (uses)- - - - 65 65 Revenues and other sources over (under) expenditures (645,945)$ (563,030) 82,915$ (485,333)$ 1,046,534 1,531,867$ FUND BALANCES, beginning of year 800,366 836,969 FUND BALANCES, end of year 237,336$ 1,883,503$ (continued) Special Revenue Funds Parks and Trails District FundCommunity Housing 474 155 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA SCHEDULES OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES – BUDGET TO ACTUAL NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS (CONTINUED) Year Ended June 30, 2022 Variance Variance Positive Positive Budget Actual (Negative) Budget Actual (Negative) REVENUES Taxes -$ -$ -$ 1,191,563$ 1,485,671$ 294,108$ Special assessments 3,500 4,146 646 - - - Licenses and permits - - - - - - Intergovernmental - - - 37,927 699 (37,228) Charges for services 1,530,189 1,545,607 15,418 - - - Fines and forfeitures - - - - - - Interest on investments 7,000 12,954 5,954 10,000 22,677 12,677 Increase (decrease) in fair market value of investments - (116,359) (116,359) - (64,621) (64,621) Loan repayment - - - - - - Other 300,667 953,851 653,184 - - - Total revenues 1,841,356 2,400,199 558,843 1,239,490 1,444,426 204,936 EXPENDITURES - BUDGET UNIT 8,024,276 2,007,909 6,016,367 3,053,001 2,404,589 648,412 Revenues over (under) expenditures (6,182,920) 392,290 6,575,210 (1,813,511) (960,163) 853,348 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES Transfers in 650,000 975,291 325,291 - 257,102 257,102 Transfers out - - - (408,550) (410,049) (1,499) Long-term debt issued - - - - - - Sale of capital assets - - - - - - Total other financing sources (uses)650,000 975,291 325,291 (408,550) (152,947) 255,603 Revenues and other sources over (under) expenditures (5,532,920)$ 1,367,581 6,900,501$ (2,222,061)$ (1,113,110) 1,108,951$ FUND BALANCES, beginning of year 2,485,166 3,026,064 FUND BALANCES, end of year 3,852,747$ 1,912,954$ (continued) Street Arterial and Collector District TIF N. 7th Corridor Special Revenue Funds 475 156 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA SCHEDULES OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES – BUDGET TO ACTUAL NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS (CONTINUED) Year Ended June 30, 2022 Variance Variance Positive Positive Budget Actual (Negative) Budget Actual (Negative) REVENUES Taxes 270,000$ 378,117$ 108,117$ 46,725$ 29,469$ (17,256)$ Special assessments - - - - - - Licenses and permits - - - - - - Intergovernmental 1,354 186 (1,168) - - - Charges for services - - - - - - Fines and forfeitures - - - - - - Interest on investments 3,000 3,087 87 - 616 616 Increase (decrease) in fair market value of investments - (21,574) (21,574) - (4,043) (4,043) Loan repayment - - - - - - Other - 37,220 37,220 - - - Total revenues 274,354 397,036 122,682 46,725 26,042 (20,683) EXPENDITURES - BUDGET UNIT 641,000 178,148 462,852 - 3,519 (3,519) Revenues over (under) expenditures (366,646) 218,888 585,534 46,725 22,523 (24,202) OTHER FINANCING SOURCES Transfers in - - - - - - Transfers out - - - - - - Long-term debt issued - - - - - - Sale of capital assets - - - - - - Total other financing sources (uses)- - - - - - Revenues and other sources over (under) expenditures (366,646)$ 218,888 585,534$ 46,725$ 22,523 (24,202)$ FUND BALANCES, beginning of year 634,070 120,751 FUND BALANCES, end of year 852,958$ 143,274$ (continued) TIF N.E. Urban Renewal TIF Mandeville/Wheat Dr. Special Revenue Funds 476 157 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA SCHEDULES OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES – BUDGET TO ACTUAL NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS (CONTINUED) Year Ended June 30, 2022 Variance Variance Positive Positive Budget Actual (Negative) Budget Actual (Negative) REVENUES Taxes -$ 31,320$ 31,320$ -$ -$ -$ Special assessments - - - - - - Licenses and permits - - - - - - Intergovernmental - - - - - - Charges for services - - - - - - Fines and forfeitures - - - 70,000 59,703 (10,297) Interest on investments - 30 30 3,500 2,060 (1,440) Increase (decrease) in fair market value of investments - - - - (12,649) (12,649) Loan repayment - - - - - - Other - - - - - - Total revenues - 31,350 31,350 73,500 49,114 (24,386) EXPENDITURES - BUDGET UNIT - - - 90,000 74,566 15,434 Revenues over (under) expenditures - 31,350 31,350 (16,500) (25,452) (8,952) OTHER FINANCING SOURCES Transfers in - - - - - - Transfers out - - - - - - Long-term debt issued - - - - - - Sale of capital assets - - - - - - Total other financing sources (uses)- - - - - - Revenues and other sources over (under) expenditures -$ 31,350 31,350$ (16,500)$ (25,452) (8,952)$ FUND BALANCES, beginning of year (7,611) 426,639 FUND BALANCES, end of year 23,739$ 401,187$ (continued) TIFD South Boz Technology Victim/Witness Advocate Special Revenue Funds 477 158 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA SCHEDULES OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES – BUDGET TO ACTUAL NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS (CONTINUED) Year Ended June 30, 2022 Variance Variance Positive Positive Budget Actual (Negative) Budget Actual (Negative) REVENUES Taxes 572,396$ 614,723$ 42,327$ -$ -$ -$ Special assessments - - - 492,990 492,037 (953) Licenses and permits - - - - - - Intergovernmental - - - - - - Charges for services - - - - - - Fines and forfeitures - - - - - - Interest on investments 5,000 3,817 (1,183) 5,890 1,732 (4,158) Increase (decrease) in fair market value of investments - (30,019) (30,019) - - - Loan repayment - - - - - - Other - - - - - - Total revenues 577,396 588,521 11,125 498,880 493,769 (5,111) EXPENDITURES - BUDGET UNIT 80,000 - 80,000 546,096 422,391 123,705 Revenues over (under) expenditures 497,396 588,521 91,125 (47,216) 71,378 118,594 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES Transfers in - - - - - - Transfers out - (102,478) (102,478) (25,520) - 25,520 Long-term debt issued - - - - - - Sale of capital assets - - - - - - Total other financing sources (uses)- (102,478) (102,478) (25,520) - 25,520 Revenues and other sources over (under) expenditures 497,396$ 486,043 (11,353)$ (72,736)$ 71,378 144,114$ FUND BALANCES, beginning of year 556,229 427,013 FUND BALANCES, end of year 1,042,272$ 498,391$ (continued) Street Lighting Special Revenue Funds Fire Department Equipment 478 159 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA SCHEDULES OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES – BUDGET TO ACTUAL NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS (CONTINUED) Year Ended June 30, 2022 Variance Variance Positive Positive Budget Actual (Negative) Budget Actual (Negative) REVENUES Taxes -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Special assessments - - - - - - Licenses and permits - - - - - - Intergovernmental - - - - - - Charges for services - - - - - - Fines and forfeitures - - - - - - Interest on investments 5,000 5,992 992 - - - Increase (decrease) in fair market value of investments - (37,543) (37,543) - - Loan repayment - - - - - - Other 50,000 736,510 686,510 - - - Total revenues 55,000 704,959 649,959 - - - EXPENDITURES - BUDGET UNIT 5,000 1,059,203 (1,054,203) - - - Revenues over (under) expenditures 50,000 (354,244) (404,244) - - - OTHER FINANCING SOURCES Transfers in - - - - - - Transfers out - - - - - - Long-term debt issued - 315,000 315,000 - - - Sale of capital assets - - - - - - Total other financing sources (uses)- 315,000 315,000 - - - Revenues and other sources over (under) expenditures 50,000$ (39,244) (89,244)$ -$ - -$ FUND BALANCES, beginning of year 1,291,141 105 FUND BALANCES, end of year 1,251,897$ 105$ (continued) Park Land Municipal Court Restitution Special Revenue Funds 479 160 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA SCHEDULES OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES – BUDGET TO ACTUAL NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS (CONTINUED) Year Ended June 30, 2022 Variance Variance Positive Positive Budget Actual (Negative) Budget Actual (Negative) REVENUES Taxes -$ 140,996$ 140,996$ 7,874,856$ 8,139,493$ 264,637$ Special assessments - - - 704,690 713,904 9,214 Licenses and permits - - - 2,233,964 2,429,645 195,681 Intergovernmental - - - 2,130,156 2,808,240 678,084 Charges for services - - - 16,262,770 17,046,169 783,399 Fines and forfeitures - - - 137,000 59,703 (77,297) Interest on investments - - - 163,065 156,818 (6,247) Increase (decrease) in fair market value of investments - - - - (953,589) (953,589) Loan repayment - - - 26,250 42,877 16,627 Other - - - 574,867 2,183,816 1,608,949 Total revenues - 140,996 140,996 30,107,618 32,627,076 2,519,458 EXPENDITURES - BUDGET UNIT - - - 40,885,743 28,063,011 12,822,732 Revenues over (under) expenditures - 140,996 140,996 (10,778,125) 4,564,065 15,342,190 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES Transfers in - - - 1,387,969 2,270,525 882,556 Transfers out - - - (5,172,068) (5,526,214) (354,146) Long-term debt issued - - - - 315,000 315,000 Sale of capital assets - - - - 12,515 12,515 Total other financing sources (uses)- - - (3,784,099) (2,928,174) 855,925 Revenues and other sources over (under) expenditures -$ 140,996 140,996$ (14,562,224)$ 1,635,891 16,198,115$ FUND BALANCES, beginning of year - 28,909,736 FUND BALANCES, end of year 140,996$ 30,545,627$ (continued) Special Revenue Funds TotalPole Yard TIF 480 161 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA SCHEDULES OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES – BUDGET TO ACTUAL NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS (CONTINUED) Year Ended June 30, 2022 Debt Service Funds Variance Variance Positive Positive Budget Actual (Negative) Budget Actual (Negative) REVENUES Taxes -$ -$ -$ 3,453,038$ 3,444,526$ (8,512)$ Special assessments - - - - - - Intergovernmental - - - - - - Charges for services - - - - - - Interest on investments 5,000 12,553 7,553 - 1,814 1,814 Increase (decrease) in fair market value of investments - (83,550) (83,550) - - Loan repayment 5,000 10,662 5,662 - - - Other - - - - - - Total revenue 10,000 (60,335) (70,335) 3,453,038 3,446,340 (6,698) EXPENDITURES Other - - - - - - Debt service: Principal - - - 1,980,000 1,980,000 - Interest and fiscal fees - - - 1,473,038 1,474,088 (1,050) Total expenditures - - - 3,453,038 3,454,088 (1,050) Revenues over (under) expenditures 10,000 (60,335) (70,335) - (7,748) (7,748) OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers in - - - - - - Transfers out (5,299,697) (2,077,709) 3,221,988 - - - Proceeds of long-term debt - - - - - - Total other financing sources (uses)(5,299,697) (2,077,709) 3,221,988 - - - Revenues and other sources over (under) expenditures (5,289,697)$ (2,138,044) 3,151,653$ -$ (7,748) (7,748)$ FUND BALANCES, beginning of year 3,601,325 55,779 FUND BALANCES, end of year 1,463,281$ 48,031$ (continued) G.O. BondsSID Revolving 481 162 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA SCHEDULES OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES – BUDGET TO ACTUAL NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS (CONTINUED) Year Ended June 30, 2022 Variance Variance Favorable Positive Budget Actual (Unfavorable) Budget Actual (Negative) REVENUES Taxes -$ -$ -$ 3,453,038$ 3,444,526$ (8,512)$ Special assessments - - - - - - Intergovernmental - - - - - - Charges for services - - - - - - Interest on investments - - - 5,000 14,367 9,367 Increase (decrease) in fair market value of investments - - - - (83,550) (83,550) Loan repayment - - - 5,000 10,662 5,662 Other - - - - - - Total revenue - - - 3,463,038 3,386,005 (77,033) EXPENDITURES Other - - - - - - Debt service: Principal 435,000 435,000 - 2,415,000 2,415,000 - Interest and fiscal fees 305,923 305,922 1 1,778,961 1,780,010 (1,049) Total expenditures 740,923 740,922 1 4,193,961 4,195,010 (1,049) Revenues over (under) expenditures (740,923) (740,922) 1 (730,923) (809,005) (78,082) OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers in 740,923 742,421 1,498 740,923 742,421 1,498 Transfers out - - - (5,299,697) (2,077,709) 3,221,988 Proceeds of long-term debt - - - - - - Total other financing sources (uses)740,923 742,421 1,498 (4,558,774) (1,335,288) 3,223,486 Revenues and other sources over (under) expenditures -$ 1,499 1,499$ (5,289,697)$ (2,144,293) 3,145,404$ FUND BALANCES, beginning of year (1,499) 3,655,605 FUND BALANCES, end of year -$ 1,511,312$ (continued) TIF Bonds Debt Service Funds Total 482 163 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA SCHEDULES OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES – BUDGET TO ACTUAL NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS (CONTINUED) Year Ended June 30, 2022 Variance Positive Budget Actual (Negative) REVENUES Intergovernmental -$ -$ -$ Charges for services 40,000 97,453 57,453 Interest on investments 20,000 8,094 (11,906) Increase (decrease) in fair market value of investments - (50,922) (50,922) Total revenues 60,000 54,625 (5,375) EXPENDITURES - BUDGET UNIT - - - Revenues over (under) expenditures 60,000 54,625 (5,375) OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)- - - Revenues and other sources over (under) expenditures 60,000$ 54,625 (5,375)$ FUND BALANCES, beginning of year 1,629,479 FUND BALANCES, end of year 1,684,104$ Cemetery Perpetual Care Permanent Fund 483 COMBINING NONMAJOR PROPRIETARY FUNDS 484 NONMAJOR PROPRIETARY FUNDS Parking Fund – Accounts for the City’s parking enforcement and facilities operations. Stormwater Fund – Accounts for the City’s stormwater management and mitigation operations. Solid Waste Fund – Accounts for the City’s garbage collection service and recycling operations. 485 164 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA COMBINING STATEMENT OF NET POSITION NONMAJOR PROPRIETARY FUNDS June 30, 2022 Solid Parking Stormwater Waste Fund Fund Fund Total ASSETS Current assets Cash and investments 381,867$ 1,474,846$ 2,062,585$ 3,919,298$ Receivables: Accrued interest 622 2,473 2,505 5,600 Customers, net 491,986 113,676 154,948 760,610 Special assessments 347 - 147 494 Total current assets 874,822 1,590,995 2,220,185 4,686,002 Non-current assets Other assets: Restricted cash and investments 131,659 600,729 58,288 790,676 Total other assets 131,659 600,729 58,288 790,676 Property, plant and equipment, net Nondepreciable: Land 228,673 303,436 - 532,109 Construction in progress - - 429,170 429,170 Depreciable: Buildings 784,340 11,916,293 24,215 12,724,848 Other structures and improvements 2,155,300 - - 2,155,300 Machinery and equipment 6,739,610 428,507 757,188 7,925,305 Vehicles 548,499 206,200 181,940 936,639 Infrastructure 118,081 47,058 6,719,594 6,884,733 Accumulated depreciation and amortization (7,913,402) (5,592,920) (1,150,537) (14,656,859) Net property, plant and equipment 2,661,101 7,308,574 6,961,570 16,931,245 Total non current assets 2,792,760 7,909,303 7,019,858 17,721,921 Deferred outflows of resources Other post-employment benefits 63,536 15,033 19,286 97,855 Pension plan contributions 236,427 49,925 78,982 365,334 Total deferred outflows of resources 299,963 64,958 98,268 463,189 Total assets 3,967,545$ 9,565,256$ 9,338,311$ 22,871,112$ (continued) Enterprise Funds Business-type Activities 486 165 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA COMBINING STATEMENT OF NET POSITION NONMAJOR PROPRIETARY FUNDS (CONTINUED) June 30, 2022 Solid Parking Stormwater Waste Fund Fund Fund Total LIABILITIES Current liabilities Accounts payable and accrued expenses 414,355$ 76,988$ 392,830$ 884,173$ Compensated absences payable 100,359 16,671 49,502 166,532 Closure and post-closure care costs, current portion 310,773 - - 310,773 Bonds and leases payable in one year - - 84,000 84,000 Total current liabilities 825,487 93,659 526,332 1,445,478 Noncurrent liabilities Closure and post-closure care costs 864,259 - - 864,259 Revenue bonds due after one year - - 1,196,000 1,196,000 Compensated absences payable 42,393 - - 42,393 Other post-employment health benefits 224,379 63,308 44,641 332,328 Net pension liability 940,699 198,641 314,255 1,453,595 Total noncurrent liabilities 2,071,730 261,949 1,554,896 3,888,575 Total liabilities 2,897,217 355,608 2,081,228 5,334,053 Deferred inflows of resources Other post-employment benefits 25,250 8,935 2,627 36,812 Pension deferrals 402,254 84,941 134,379 621,574 Total deferred inflows of resources 427,504 93,876 137,006 658,386 NET POSITION Net Investment in capital assets 2,661,101 7,308,574 5,739,858 15,709,533 Restricted for parking capital projects - 130,316 - 130,316 Restricted for debt service - - 58,288 58,288 Unrestricted (2,018,277) 1,676,882 1,321,931 980,536 Total net position 642,824 9,115,772 7,120,077 16,878,673 Total liabilities, deferred inflows and net position 3,967,545$ 9,565,256$ 9,338,311$ 22,871,112$ Enterprise Funds Business-type Activities 487 166 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA COMBINING STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENSES, AND CHANGES IN NET POSITION NONMAJOR PROPRIETARY FUNDS Year Ended June 30, 2022 Solid Parking Stormwater Waste Fund Fund Fund Totals OPERATING REVENUES 5,431,005$ 1,062,010$ 1,673,866$ 8,166,881$ OPERATING EXPENSES Salaries and benefits 1,722,989 386,769 595,618 2,705,376 Materials and supplies 514,291 27,312 21,638 563,241 Repairs and maintenance 328,038 57,172 12,205 397,415 Utilities 643,268 39,887 4,806 687,961 Administrative charges 934,264 87,366 291,080 1,312,710 Other expenses 575,259 352,920 95,677 1,023,856 Depreciation and amortization 534,989 409,185 189,198 1,133,372 Changes in estimated closure and post- closure care costs (33,087) - - (33,087) Total operating expenses 5,220,011 1,360,611 1,210,222 7,790,844 Operating income (loss)210,994 (298,601) 463,644 376,037 NON-OPERATING REVENUES (EXPENSES) Interest income 1,063 17,801 9,034 27,898 Net increase (decrease) in fair market value of investments (15,420) (60,845) (61,927) (138,192) Interest expense - - (33,538) (33,538) Other income 31,983 2,831 - 34,814 Intergovernmental income 27,387 5,783 9,149 42,319 Total non-operating revenues (expenses)45,013 (34,430) (77,282) (66,699) Income (loss) before contributions and transfers 256,007 (333,031) 386,362 309,338 Contributions of infrastructure - developers - - 997,563 997,563 Transfers in 359,000 - 194,735 553,735 Transfers out - - - - Change in net position 615,007 (333,031) 1,578,660 1,860,636 NET POSITION, beginning of year 27,817 9,448,803 5,541,417 15,018,037 NET POSITION, end of year 642,824$ 9,115,772$ 7,120,077$ 16,878,673$ Business-type Activities Enterprise Funds 488 167 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA COMBINING STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS - NONMAJOR PROPRIETARY FUNDS Year Ended June 30, 2022 Solid Parking Stormwater Waste Fund Fund Fund Total CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES Non-cash investment activity (15,420)$ (60,845)$ (61,927)$ (138,192)$ Receipts from customers 5,368,060 1,061,245 1,657,269 8,086,574 Receipts from others 54,473 2,831 - 57,304 Payments to suppliers (2,690,188) (434,677) 243,859 (2,881,006) Payments to employees (1,743,470) (404,117) (575,554) (2,723,141) Payments to internal service funds and administrative fees (934,264) (87,366) (291,080) (1,312,710) Net cash flows from operating activities 39,191 77,071 972,567 1,088,829 CASH FLOWS FROM NON-CAPITAL FINANCING ACTIVITIES Transfers in 359,000 - 194,735 553,735 Receipts from grants and intergovernmental sources 27,387 5,783 9,149 42,319 Net cash flows from non-capital financing activities 386,387 5,783 203,884 596,054 CASH FLOWS FROM CAPITAL AND RELATED FINANCING ACTIVITIES Acquisition of capital assets (101,825) (66,666) (391,376) (559,867) Principal paid on bonds, interfund loans, loans and leases - - (82,000) (82,000) Interest paid on bonds, interfund loans, loans and leases - - (33,538) (33,538) Net cash flows from capital and related financing activities (101,825) (66,666) (506,914) (675,405) CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES Interest on investments 441 18,295 6,529 25,265 Net cash flows from investing activities 441 18,295 6,529 25,265 Net change in cash and investments 324,194 34,483 676,066 1,034,743 Cash and investments, beginning of year 189,332 2,041,092 1,444,807 3,675,231 Cash and investments, end of year 513,526$ 2,075,575$ 2,120,873$ 4,709,974$ (continued) 489 168 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA COMBINING STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS - NONMAJOR PROPRIETARY FUNDS (CONTINUED) Year Ended June 30, 2022 Solid Parking Stormwater Waste Fund Fund Fund Total Cash and investments classified as: Cash and investments 381,867$ 1,474,846$ 2,062,585$ 3,919,298$ Restricted cash and investments 131,659 600,729 58,288 790,676 Totals 513,526$ 2,075,575$ 2,120,873$ 4,709,974$ Noncash transactions: donated infrastructure -$ -$ 997,563$ 997,563$ RECONCILIATION OF OPERATING LOSS TO NET CASH FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES: Operating income (loss)210,994$ (298,601)$ 463,644$ 376,037$ Adjustments to reconcile operating loss to net cash from operating activities: Depreciation and amortization 534,989 409,185 189,198 1,133,372 Non-cash fair market value increase (decrease) on investments (15,420) (60,845) (61,927) (138,192) Change in estimated closure costs (310,773) - - (310,773) Other income 31,983 2,831 - 34,814 Change in assets and liabilities: (Increase) decrease in: Accounts receivable (62,945) (765) (16,597) (80,307) Other governments receivable 22,490 - - 22,490 Increase (decrease) in: Accounts payable (351,646) 42,614 378,185 69,153 Accrued employee benefits payable 25,538 1,063 15,664 42,265 Net pension liabilities (46,019) (18,411) 4,400 (60,030) Total adjustments (171,803) 375,672 508,923 712,792 Net cash from operating activities 39,191$ 77,071$ 972,567$ 1,088,829$ 490 INTERNAL SERVICE FUND STATEMENTS 491 INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS Internal Service Funds are used to account for the goods or services provided by one department to other departments of the City on a cost-reimbursement basis. Vehicle Maintenance Shop – Accounts for the maintenance and repair of vehicles used in operation of City services. Medical Health Insurance – Accounts for insurance premiums received from the various City departments and retirees, and the related costs of health and dental premiums paid to the City’s insurance provider. Public Works Administration – Accounts for the professional level management, engineering, and GIS technical support provided to other Public Works divisions, including water, wastewater, solid waste, stormwater, in addition to support provided to other City departments. 492 169 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA COMBINING STATEMENT OF NET POSITION - INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS Year Ended June 30, 2022 Vehicle Medical Public Maintenance Health Works Shop Insurance Administration Total ASSETS Current assetsCash and equivalents -$ -$ 3,010,670$ 3,010,670$ Customer receivables, net 919 19,391 3,553 23,863 Prepaid expenses - 466,536 - 466,536 Total current assets 919 485,927 3,014,223 3,501,069 NON-CURRENT ASSETS Property, plant, and equipmentMachinery and equipment 179,932 - 450,822 630,754 Vehicles 85,283 - 139,612 224,895 Buildings 1,424,215 - 121,905 1,546,120 Less: accumulated depreciation (830,495) - (355,124) (1,185,619) Net property, plant, and equipment 858,935 - 357,215 1,216,150 Intangible right-of-use leased assets Leased building - - 423,122 423,122 Less: accumulated amortization - - (42,312) (42,312) Net intangible right-of-use leased assets - - 380,810 380,810 Deferred outflows of resources Other post-employment benefits 22,833 - 67,826 90,659 Pension plan contributions 91,162 - 309,102 400,264 Total deferred outflows of resources 113,995 - 376,928 490,923 Total assets and deferred outflows of resources 973,849$ 485,927$ 4,129,176$ 5,588,952$ LIABILITIES Current liabilities Accounts payable 81,686$ 373$ 154,376$ 236,435$ Compensated absences payable 21,169 - 239,850 261,019 Current portion lease obligations - - 70,968 70,968 Due to other city funds 773,242 18,565 - 791,807 Total current liabilities 876,097 18,938 465,194 1,360,229 Non-current liabilities Other post-employment health benefits 73,777 - 237,720 311,497 Lease obligations - - 335,175 335,175 Net pension liability 339,079 - 1,202,722 1,541,801 Total non-current liabilities 412,856 - 1,775,617 2,188,473 Total liabilities 1,288,953 18,938 2,240,811 3,548,702 Deferred inflows of resources Other post-employment health benefits 6,968 - 20,635 27,603 Pension deferrals 155,928 - 565,931 721,859 Total deferred inflows of resources 162,896 - 586,566 749,462 NET POSITIONNet investment in capital assets 858,935 - (48,928) 810,007 Unrestricted (1,336,935) 466,989 1,350,727 480,781 Total net position (478,000) 466,989 1,301,799 1,290,788 Total liabilities, deferred inflows of resources and net position 973,849$ 485,927$ 4,129,176$ 5,588,952$ 493 170 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA COMBINING STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENSES, AND CHANGES IN NET POSITION - INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS Year Ended June 30, 2022 Vehicle Medical Public Maintenance Health Works Shop Insurance Administration Total OPERATING REVENUES 1,639,483$ 5,363,959$ 4,888,587 11,892,029$ OPERATING EXPENSES Salaries and benefits 678,158 - 2,451,767 3,129,925 Materials and supplies 822,861 - 53,968 876,829 Repairs and maintenance 30,112 - 11,350 41,462 Utilities 24,716 - 8,392 33,108 Administrative charges 207,438 - 321,646 529,084 Insurance claims - 5,225,268 5,434 5,230,702 Other expenses 50,529 80,797 846,499 977,825 Depreciation 58,629 - 117,470 176,099 Total operating expenses 1,872,443 5,306,065 3,816,526 10,995,034 Operating income (loss)(232,960) 57,894 1,072,061 896,995 NON-OPERATING REVENUES (EXPENSES) Interest income - - 12,651 12,651 Interest expense (1,976) (200) (5,486) (7,662) Increase (decrease) in fair market value of investments - - (87,463) (87,463) Other income 124 - 14,000 14,124 Intergovernmental income 11,120 - 39,425 50,545 Total non-operating revenue (expenses)9,268 (200) (26,873) (17,805) Income before transfers (223,692) 57,694 1,045,188 879,190 Transfers in - - - - Change in net position (223,692) 57,694 1,045,188 879,190 NET POSITION, beginning of year (254,308) 409,295 256,611 411,598 NET POSITION, end of year (478,000)$ 466,989$ 1,301,799$ 1,290,788$ 494 171 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA COMBINING STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS - INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS Year Ended June 30, 2022 Vehicle Medical Public Maintenance Health Works Shop Insurance Administration Total CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATIONS Non-cash investment activity -$ -$ (87,463)$ (87,463)$ Receipts from customers 1,642,146 5,360,894 4,885,034 11,888,074 Receipts from others 124 - 14,000 14,124 Operating loans from other City funds 181,664 (22,641) - 159,023 Payments to suppliers (945,822) (80,424) (1,063,243) (2,089,489) Payments to employees (679,818) (5,257,629) (2,354,005) (8,291,452) Payments to Internal Service funds and administrative fees (207,438) - (321,646) (529,084) Net cash flows from operating activities (9,144) 200 1,072,677 1,063,733 CASH FLOWS FROM CAPITAL AND RELATED FINANCING ACTIVITIES Additions to property, plant and equipment - - (84,247) (84,247) Principal paid on bonds, interfund loans, loans and leases - - (31,986) (31,986) Interest paid on bonds, interfund loans, loans and leases (1,976) (200) (5,486) (7,662) Net cash flows from capital and related financing activities (1,976) (200) (121,719) (123,895) CASH FLOWS FROM NON-CAPITAL FINANCING ACTIVITIES Receipts from grants and intergovernmental sources 11,120 - 39,425 50,545 Transfers in - - - - Net cash flows from non-capital and related financing activities 11,120 - 39,425 50,545 CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES Interest on investments - - 12,651 12,651 Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents - - 1,003,034 1,003,034 CASH AND EQUIVALENTS, beginning of year - - 2,007,636 2,007,636 CASH AND EQUIVALENTS, end of year -$ -$ 3,010,670$ 3,010,670$ NON-CASH FLOWS FROM CAPITAL AND RELATED FINANCING ACTIVITIES Building acquired through leasing activities -$ -$ 423,122$ 423,122$ (continued) 495 172 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA COMBINING STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS - INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS (CONTINUED) Year Ended June 30, 2022 Vehicle Medical Public Maintenance Health Works Shop Insurance Administration Total RECONCILIATION OF OPERATING INCOME (LOSS) TO NET CASH FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES Operating income (loss)(232,960)$ 57,894$ 1,072,061$ 896,995$ Adjustments to reconcile operating income (loss) to net cash from operating activities: Depreciation 58,629 - 117,470 176,099 Other income 125 - 15,552 15,677 Non-cash fair value increase (decrease) on investments - - (87,463) (87,463) Changes in assets and liabilities: (Increase) decrease in: Other receivables Customer receivables 2,663 (3,065) 3,553 3,151 Prepaid expenses - (32,361) (8,657) (41,018) Increase (decrease) in: Accounts payable 1,928 373 (73,785) (71,484) Due to other city funds 181,664 (22,641) - 159,023 Compensated absences payable (9,665) - 73,307 63,642 Other post-employment health benefits 8,005 - 29,889 37,894 Net pension (19,533) - (69,250) (88,783) Total adjustments 223,816 (57,694) 616 166,738 Net cash from operating activities (9,144)$ 200$ 1,072,677$ 1,063,733$ 496 FIDUCIARY FUND STATEMENTS 497 FIDUCIARY FUNDS CUSTODIAL FUNDS Custodial funds are used to account for assets held by the City as an agent for individuals, private organizations, and other governments. Custodial funds are used to report fiduciary activities that are not required to be reported in pension (or other employee benefit) trust funds, investment trust funds, or private-purpose trust funds. The following custodial fund is included in the Fiduciary Fund financial statements: Tourism Business Improvement District – Accounts for amounts collected from hotels on behalf of the District, a special-purpose government, whose purpose is to enhance the economic vitality of Bozeman by promoting tourism through sales and marketing strategies. Municipal Court Trust Fund – Accounts for monies held for appearance bonds and restitution to criminal arrests and reimbursement for damage caused. 498 173 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA COMBINING STATEMENT OF FIDUCIARY NET POSITION – CUSTODIAL FUNDS June 30, 2022 Municipal Tourism Court Business Improvement Total of Fund District Custodial Funds ASSETS Cash and investments 583,792$ 50,170$ 633,962$ Customer receivables 2,692 - 2,692 Total assets 586,484$ 50,170$ 636,654$ LIABILITIES Accounts payable 589,447 - 589,447 NET POSITION Restricted for other organization or individuals (2,963) 50,170 47,207 Total liabilities and net position 586,484$ 50,170$ 636,654$ 499 174 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA COMBINING STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN FIDUCIARY NET POSITION – CUSTODIAL FUNDS Year Ended June 30, 2022 Municipal Tourism Court Business Improvement Total of Fund District Custodial Funds ADDITIONS Contributions Interest income -$ -$ -$ DEDUCTIONS Miscellaneous - - - Change in net position - - - NET POSITION - Beginning of Year (2,963) 50,170 47,207 NET POSITION - End of Year (2,963)$ 50,170$ 47,207$ 500 PART III STATISTICAL SECTION 501 Statistical Section This part of the City of Bozeman’s annual comprehensive financial report presents detailed information as a context for understanding what the information in the financial statements, note disclosures and required supplementary information says about the government’s overall financial health. Contents Page Financial Trends These schedules contain trend information to help the reader understand how the government’s financial performance and well-being have changed over time. 175 Revenue Capacity These schedules contain information to help the reader assess the government’s most significant local revenue source, the property tax. 180 Debt Capacity These schedules present information to help the reader assess the affordability of the government’s current levels of outstanding debt and the government’s ability to issue additional debt in the future. 193 Demographic and Economic Information These schedules offer demographic and economic indicators to help the reader understand the environment within which the government’s financial activities take place. 202 Operating Information These schedules contain service and infrastructure data to help the reader understand how the information in the government’s financial report relates to the services the government provides and the activities it performs. 204 Sources: Unless otherwise noted, the information in these schedules is derived from the City of Bozeman annual comprehensive financial reports for the relevant year. 502 FINANCIAL TRENDS SECTION 503 175 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NET POSITION BY COMPONENT Past Ten Fiscal Years 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Governmental activitiesNet investment in capital assets 89,081,484$ 89,267,076$ 93,409,850$ 104,342,191$ 115,696,956$ 137,058,945$ 155,191,911$ 118,577,368$ 196,931,242$ 217,241,690$ Restricted 27,255,029 35,621,803 41,755,126 42,829,320 41,583,992 36,522,195 21,202,050 69,208,376 68,458,112 55,321,501 Unrestricted 11,521,053 12,127,224 (5,137,642) (3,923,466) (4,839,467) (5,514,909) 4,799,426 27,280,681 (31,383,436) (15,708,281) Total governmental activities 127,857,566$ 137,016,103$ 130,027,334$ 143,248,045$ 152,441,481 168,066,231 181,193,387 215,066,425 234,005,918 256,854,910 Business-type activities Net investment in capital assets 199,394,551$ 205,501,357$ 211,419,777$ 221,385,655$ 229,372,281$ 239,254,236$ 245,190,586$ 260,124,896$ 271,812,360$ 286,461,913$ Restricted 3,098,125 3,372,927 4,977,984 4,990,635 8,866,951 13,070,517 12,671,931 12,307,565 14,839,596 29,337,941 Unrestricted 10,643,337 8,723,353 6,619,399 10,582,408 9,154,014 12,923,470 21,053,523 25,801,918 23,152,084 14,910,714 Total business-type activities 213,136,013$ 217,597,637$ 223,017,160$ 236,958,698$ 247,393,246 265,248,223 278,916,040 298,234,379 309,804,040 330,710,568 Primary government Net investment in capital assets 288,476,035$ 294,768,433$ 304,829,627$ 325,727,846$ 345,069,237$ 376,313,181$ 400,382,497$ 378,702,264$ 468,743,602$ 503,703,603$ Restricted 30,353,154 38,994,730 46,733,110 47,819,955 50,450,943 49,592,712 33,873,981 81,515,941 83,297,708 84,659,442 Unrestricted 22,164,390 20,850,577 1,481,757 6,658,942 4,314,547 7,408,561 25,852,949 53,082,599 (8,231,352) (797,567) Total primary government net position 340,993,579$ 354,613,740$ 353,044,494$ 380,206,743$ 399,834,727$ 433,314,454$ 460,109,427$ 513,300,804$ 543,809,958$ 587,565,478$ Fiscal Years 504 176 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA CHANGES IN NET POSITION Past Ten Fiscal Years (accrual basis of accounting) 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Expenses Governmental Activities: General Government 7,373,368$ 6,989,830$ 7,417,644$ 8,058,925$ 9,415,702$ 9,896,366$ 10,310,075$ 9,854,245$ 11,517,404$ 12,352,494$ Public Safety 14,340,301 15,297,088 17,023,578 18,391,357 17,689,004 18,637,422 19,699,377 20,664,687 22,698,030 22,442,450 Public Service 3,939,061 6,031,768 6,458,930 6,861,939 7,857,917 8,615,272 9,850,802 9,781,345 11,018,661 12,176,141 Public Welfare 6,518,822 7,417,158 7,579,653 7,994,697 9,210,264 9,476,010 9,658,817 10,354,632 13,429,890 16,211,729 Interest and Fiscal Fees 433,766 179,280 824,266 893,470 771,714 781,255 786,236 1,763,155 2,105,985 2,051,119 Total Governmental Activities Expenses 32,605,318$ 35,915,124$ 39,304,071$ 42,200,388$ 44,944,601$ 47,406,325$ 50,305,307$ 52,418,064$ 60,769,970$ 65,233,933$ Business-Type Activities: Water 6,154,746$ 6,869,870$ 7,995,910$ 9,273,395$ 9,740,629$ 9,832,508$ 9,984,114$ 9,807,970$ 10,687,976$ 11,604,238$ Waste Water 6,121,663 8,955,592 6,940,983 8,163,312 8,590,477 8,548,138 9,291,509 9,209,689 10,209,279 10,849,992 Solid Waste 2,475,680 6,958,209 3,308,441 4,570,884 4,262,650 4,535,865 4,739,710 4,665,613 4,991,829 5,220,011 Non-Major Activities 852,561 966,454 1,098,771 1,300,612 1,827,722 2,011,950 2,043,748 2,355,962 2,194,890 2,604,371 Total Business-Type Activities Expenses 15,604,650$ 23,750,125$ 19,344,105$ 23,308,203$ 24,421,478$ 24,928,461$ 26,059,081$ 26,039,234$ 28,083,974$ 30,278,612$ Total Primary Government Expenses 48,209,968$ 59,665,249$ 58,648,176$ 65,508,591$ 69,366,079$ 72,334,786$ 76,364,388$ 78,457,298$ 88,853,944$ 95,512,545$ Program RevenuesGovernmental Activities: Charges for Services:General Government 1,966,966$ 2,453,015$ 1,947,445$ 2,530,474$ 2,683,016$ 3,139,427$ 3,777,184$ 3,546,689$ 4,380,033$ 5,472,678$ Public Safety 3,219,231 3,290,573 3,211,911 3,347,859 3,175,257 2,234,994 4,158,560 4,020,453 4,260,366 4,317,541 Public Service 6,655,604 7,623,178 8,784,447 9,310,147 10,342,921 15,531,304 12,189,258 16,522,229 18,836,107 19,176,512 Public Welfare 1,593,212 613,322 1,097,845 1,213,526 1,414,394 1,593,025 1,724,864 1,567,557 5,294,909 6,833,910 Operating Grants and Contributions 406,239 457,354 2,254,052 2,494,244 2,715,986 3,021,400 5,419,871 7,622,415 12,156,812 7,707,580 Capital Grants and Contributions 844,935 4,762,416 2,960,051 5,018,559 2,667,352 7,651,008 6,593,221 15,429,642 4,518,830 12,153,695 Total Governmental Activities Program Revenues 14,686,187$ 19,199,858$ 20,255,751$ 23,914,809$ 22,998,926$ 33,171,158$ 33,862,958$ 48,708,985$ 49,447,057$ 55,661,916$ Business-Type Activities Charges for Services: Water 9,585,939$ 9,842,699$ 9,969,058$ 11,935,016$ 11,166,944$ 12,915,454$ 11,438,495$ 11,913,879$ 13,970,784$ 15,431,185$ Waste Water 8,560,438 8,852,738 9,008,247 9,283,600 9,668,524 10,686,506 10,445,185 10,671,361 11,691,165 12,684,974 Solid Waste 2,532,676 2,725,465 2,953,414 2,617,243 3,613,721 3,926,123 4,228,099 4,631,523 4,969,868 5,431,005 Non-Major Activities 644,672 872,325 891,379 3,207,605 2,172,399 2,282,839 2,308,182 2,457,485 2,525,782 2,735,876 Operating Grants and Contributions - 9,596 123,439 134,946 169,509 134,523 83,264 104,868 243,536 1,511,436 Capital Grants and Contributions:156,123 5,898,923 6,385,418 11,287,654 7,774,707 9,944,719 8,324,760 13,312,504 5,427,166 13,064,462 Total Business-Type Activities Program Revenues 21,479,848$ 28,201,746$ 29,330,955$ 38,466,064$ 34,565,804$ 39,890,164$ 36,827,985$ 43,091,620$ 38,828,301$ 50,858,938$ Total Primary Government Program Revenues 36,166,035$ 47,401,604$ 49,586,706$ 62,380,873$ 57,564,730$ 73,061,322$ 70,690,943$ 91,800,605$ 88,275,358$ 106,520,854$ Fiscal Year 505 177 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA CHANGES IN NET POSITION (CONTINUED) Past Ten Fiscal Years (accrual basis of accounting) 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Net (Expense) / Revenue Governmental Activities (17,919,131)$ (16,715,266)$ (19,048,320)$ (18,285,579)$ (21,945,675)$ (14,235,167)$ (16,442,349)$ (3,709,079)$ (11,322,913)$ (9,572,017)$ Business-Type Activities 5,875,198 4,060,921 9,986,850 15,157,861 10,144,326 14,961,703 10,768,904 17,052,386 10,744,327 20,580,326 Total Primary Government Net Expense (12,043,933)$ (12,654,345)$ (9,061,470)$ (3,127,718)$ (11,801,349)$ 726,536$ (5,673,445)$ 13,343,307$ (578,586)$ 11,008,309$ General Revenues and Other Changes in Net Position Governmental Activities: Taxes Property Taxes 16,429,959$ 17,561,022$ 20,203,718$ 21,234,288$ 21,708,812$ 22,532,724$ 23,823,994$ 28,308,301$ 27,115,391$ 29,432,001$ Unrestricted Grants and Contributions 6,342,884 7,436,419 7,699,711 7,992,180 8,372,625 6,171,297 4,658,177 4,859,238 4,956,187 5,099,529 Investment Earnings 243,744 355,790 403,152 519,637 554,870 64,058 1,490,286 1,604,365 428,653 652,534 Increase (decrease) in fair market value of investments - - - - - - - - - (2,337,888) Miscellaneous - 293,884 374,966 418,215 1,317,137 2,320,536 1,009,437 1,128,061 (1,722,976) 520,517 Gain (Loss) on sale of assets 1,765 236,688 - 123,934 (71,335) 28,861 167,291 16,862 20,072 (15,735) Transfers (10,000) (10,000) (410,016) 1,218,036 (742,999) (758,084) (475,000) (546,353) (534,921) (1,396,976) Total Governmental Activities 23,008,352$ 25,873,803$ 28,271,531$ 31,506,290$ 31,139,110$ 30,359,392$ 30,674,185$ 35,370,474$ 30,262,406$ 31,953,982$ Business-Type Activities: Unrestricted Grants and Contributions 508,912$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Investment Earnings - - - - 304,231 3,389 1,010,849 846,331 38,987 321,644 Increase (decrease) in fair market value of investments - - - - - - - - - (1,613,219) Miscellaneous - - - - 1,256,284 2,529,824 362,631 518,162 233,508 219,770 ARRA Debt Forgiveness - 390,700 - - - - - - - - Gain (Loss) on sale of assets - - - - (2,013,292) 10,005 (172,428) 4,012 17,918 1,031 Transfers 10,000 10,000 380,347 (1,218,036) 742,999 758,084 475,000 546,353 534,921 1,396,976 Total Business-Type Activities 518,912 400,700 380,347 (1,218,036) 290,222 3,301,302 1,676,052 1,914,858 825,334 326,202 Total Primary Government 23,527,264 26,274,503 28,651,878 30,288,254 31,429,332 33,660,694 32,350,237 37,285,332 31,087,740 32,280,184 Restatement of Beginning Net Position Governmental Activities -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ (1,104,680)$ 2,211,643$ -$ 467,027$ Business-Type Activities - - - - - - 1,222,861 351,095 - - Total Primary Government -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 118,181$ 2,562,738$ -$ 467,027$ Change in Net Position Governmental Activities 5,089,221$ 9,158,537$ 9,223,211$ 13,220,711$ 9,193,435$ 16,124,225$ 13,127,156$ 33,873,038$ 18,939,493$ 22,381,965$ Business-Type Activities 6,394,110 4,461,621 10,367,197 13,939,825 10,434,548 18,263,005 13,667,817 19,318,339 11,569,661 20,906,528 Total Primary Government 11,483,331$ 13,620,158$ 19,590,408$ 27,160,536$ 19,627,983$ 34,387,230$ 26,794,973$ 53,191,377$ 30,509,154$ 43,288,493$ Fiscal Year 506 178 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA FUND BALANCE - GOVERNMENT FUNDS Past Ten Fiscal Years (modified accrual basis of accounting) 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 General Fund Assigned 7,327,375$ 6,420,760$ 6,061,965$ 5,541,841$ 6,402,882$ 7,739,020$ 7,739,582$ 8,110,313$ 9,313,580$ 8,708,695$ Unassigned - 193,534 - 979,258 87,274 (274,252) - 1,030,550 (130,315) (107,076) Total general fund 7,327,375$ 6,614,294$ 6,061,965$ 6,521,099$ 6,490,156$ 7,464,768$ 7,739,582$ 9,140,863$ 9,183,265$ 8,601,619$ All Other Governmental Nonspendable 1,193,530$ 1,269,557$ 2,061,790$ 1,426,575$ 1,533,338$ 1,623,816$ 1,735,591$ 1,796,174$ 1,884,479$ 1,919,979$ Restricted 26,061,499 19,927,526 12,546,935 39,856,356 38,938,127 34,403,744 23,129,241 65,273,723 61,818,904 55,582,529 Committed 851,322 3,075,505 3,088,936 3,528,263 3,901,694 3,856,238 4,279,091 4,328,163 3,621,644 3,168,927 Assigned - 229,602 - 7,425,398 7,259,749 1,868,485 1,293,436 578,852 96,473 134,135 Unassigned 456,669 (184,101) (97,173) 914,535 107,103 (42,648) 8,731,534 (125,584) 662,773 (312,180) Total all other governmental funds 28,563,020$ 24,318,089$ 17,600,488$ 53,151,127$ 51,740,011$ 41,709,635$ 39,168,893$ 71,851,328$ 68,084,273$ 60,493,390$ Fiscal Year 507 179 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES - GOVERNMENT FUNDS Past Ten Fiscal Years (modified accrual basis of accounting) 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Revenues Taxes 16,540,972$ 17,385,371$ 20,404,236$ 21,303,074$ 21,682,667$ 22,553,972$ 23,788,018$ 28,321,349$ 26,973,106$ 29,607,197$ Special assessments 1,752,615 2,011,944 1,578,855 1,265,954 1,163,275 1,137,103 1,116,925 1,390,355 1,676,909 1,616,318 Licenses and permits 1,629,744 1,784,282 1,827,842 2,112,090 2,092,673 2,541,727 2,392,081 2,524,368 2,902,616 2,850,060 Intergovernmental 7,586,007 8,208,770 8,562,937 8,920,424 8,956,044 9,419,104 10,488,662 12,600,824 15,297,152 12,638,682 Charges for service 8,806,969 9,656,123 10,629,791 12,283,683 13,743,830 17,885,529 16,987,622 20,142,910 24,847,833 30,095,236 Fines and forfeitures 1,394,652 1,411,162 1,305,166 1,253,705 1,256,525 1,240,154 1,234,324 1,199,601 1,168,880 1,053,196 Interest on investments 239,778 329,086 370,305 479,699 520,690 34,709 1,439,743 1,343,201 155,647 452,369 Increase (decrease) in fair market value of investments - - - - - - - - - (2,337,889) Loan repayment 157,069 63,980 94,989 38,552 31,837 25,827 31,695 44,930 38,276 53,539 Other 394,677 287,089 363,274 415,646 1,307,668 2,313,097 995,553 1,790,144 1,766,620 2,712,894 Total revenues 38,502,483 41,137,807 45,137,395 48,072,827 50,755,209 57,151,222 58,474,623 69,357,682 74,827,039 78,741,602 Expenditures General government 7,276,839 6,138,575 6,594,474 7,318,539 7,643,886 8,268,285 8,782,078 9,280,183 10,449,026 11,891,184 Public safety 13,822,691 14,637,886 15,086,695 16,485,549 16,812,131 17,602,966 18,005,944 19,598,592 19,778,375 22,104,511 Public service 2,805,612 3,498,770 3,786,283 3,840,405 4,422,771 4,955,559 5,774,783 5,376,499 5,868,383 6,977,080 Public welfare 6,216,387 6,678,347 7,366,955 7,245,425 7,654,059 7,975,354 8,339,885 9,046,331 11,690,142 14,598,944 Other 15,776 1,046,712 1,113,340 418,431 506,169 655,532 728,642 665,517 3,500,760 2,204,370 Capital outlay 2,782,435 8,053,456 9,905,333 9,337,470 12,468,020 18,420,501 19,106,110 24,265,809 32,608,736 30,801,575 Debt service Principal 1,826,126 1,482,142 1,121,593 1,345,250 1,422,555 1,500,687 1,635,369 6,639,947 3,188,603 2,969,165 Interest & Fiscal Fees 445,736 380,950 824,266 893,470 771,714 718,597 786,238 1,763,155 2,105,985 2,051,119 Total expenditures 35,191,602 41,916,838 45,798,939 46,884,539 51,701,305 60,097,481 63,159,049 76,636,033 89,190,010 93,597,948 Excess of revenues over (under) expenditures 3,310,881 (779,031) (661,544) 1,188,288 (946,096) (2,946,259) (4,684,426) (7,278,351) (14,362,971) (14,856,346) Other Financing Sources (Uses) Proceeds from borrowing - - - - - - - - - - Transfers in 4,291,417 3,103,787 4,816,671 6,483,413 3,950,059 4,394,277 4,202,825 8,867,568 5,976,400 10,802,182 Transfers out (4,454,505) (3,113,787) (5,197,018) (5,496,492) (4,693,058) (5,152,361) (4,677,825) (9,413,920) (6,511,321) (12,199,158) Issuance of debt 1,203,279 10,012,647 5,619,361 47,406 234,702 1,103,586 2,859,598 41,878,844 10,501,000 7,045,000 Premium on Bonds Issued - - - - - - - - 649,009 515,591 Issuance of lease (as lessee)- - - - - - - - - 19,833 Sales of capital assets 2,775 243,092 64,855 227,984 43,277 35,144 33,898 29,567 23,744 34,836 Total other financing sources (uses)1,042,966 10,245,739 5,303,869 1,262,311 (465,020) 380,646 2,418,496 41,362,059 10,638,832 6,218,284 Extraordinary items Net change in fund balances 4,353,847$ 9,466,708$ 4,642,325$ 2,450,599$ (1,411,116)$ (2,565,613)$ (2,265,930)$ 34,083,708$ (3,724,139)$ (8,638,062)$ Debt service as a percentage of 7.0% 5.5% 5.4% 6.0%5.6%5.3%5.5% 16.0%9.4%8.0% noncapital expenditures Fiscal Year 508 REVENUE CAPACITY SECTION 509 180 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA ASSESSED VALUE OF TAXABLE PROPERTY Past Ten Fiscal Years Fiscal Total Total Assessed Taxable Year Taxable Direct Total Value ** as a Ended Residential Commercial & Other Assessed Tax Market Percentage of June 30,Property Industrial Property Property Value **Rate Value *Total Market Value 2013 46,606,560 31,625,880 4,993,560 83,226,000 166.75 3,176,282,865 2.620% 2014 47,956,720 32,542,060 5,138,220 85,637,000 173.08 3,386,295,608 2.529% 2015 50,978,520 31,641,840 5,273,640 87,894,000 188.76 3,598,269,877 2.443% 2016 50,899,738 29,864,642 5,799,800 86,564,180 210.16 5,698,588,679 1.519% 2017 52,777,954 30,966,657 6,013,815 89,758,426 205.30 5,870,738,906 1.529% 2018 56,952,419 37,199,199 7,043,156 101,194,775 187.33 6,745,351,312 1.500% 2019 58,712,093 38,348,553 7,260,771 104,321,416 191.24 6,981,943,409 1.494% 2020 70,588,175 46,105,567 8,729,455 125,423,197 188.45 8,596,253,775 1.459% 2021 72,903,489 47,617,844 9,015,783 129,537,117 169.48 8,875,762,356 1.459% 2022 87,432,389 57,107,580 10,812,534 155,352,503 154.12 10,724,564,866 1.449% Source: Based on information provided by Gallatin County and Montana Department of Revenue Note: Property in Gallatin County is reassessed by the State Department of Revenue every two years. * Sales price of property is not public record in the State of Montana, so the Total Market Value was used instead ** Includes tax-exempt property 510 181 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA CITY TAXABLE MARKET AND TAXABLE VALUES Past Ten Fiscal Years Fiscal Net Taxable Value Year Incremental Value (excludes Tax Taxable Value Ended Taxable Full for All Tax Increment Districts for Open Space June 30,Market Value Taxable Value Increment Districts Incremental Values)Purposes 2013 3,176,282,865 86,934,533 3,708,138 83,226,395 n/a * 2014 3,386,295,608 89,650,917 4,013,561 85,637,356 85,615,328 2015 3,598,269,877 92,081,322 4,186,781 87,894,541 90,735,030 2016 5,698,588,679 90,787,797 4,223,617 86,564,180 91,973,923 2017 5,870,738,906 94,102,761 4,344,335 89,758,426 93,212,816 2018 6,745,351,312 106,224,806 5,030,031 101,194,775 105,727,520 2019 6,981,943,409 109,713,782 5,392,366 104,321,416 191,152,592 2020 8,596,253,775 133,582,036 8,158,839 125,423,197 133,391,037 2021 8,875,762,356 137,983,427 8,446,310 129,537,117 137,765,762 2022 10,724,564,866 166,838,141 11,485,638 155,352,503 164,979,565 Source: Based on information provided by Gallatin County and Montana Department of Revenue Note: Property is assessed by the State Department of Revenue every two years. * No certified value available, first certification available for FY2014 511 182 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT TAXABLE VALUATION DETAIL Past Ten Fiscal Years Fiscal Year Ended Base Incremental Total Base Incremental Total Base Incremental Total June 30,Taxable Taxable Taxable Taxable Taxable Taxable Taxable Taxable Taxable 2013 1,328,695 2,396,293 3,724,988 423,054 150,217 573,271 2,886,997 1,084,216 3,971,213 2014 1,328,695 2,586,963 3,915,658 423,054 172,608 595,662 2,886,997 1,193,297 4,080,294 2015 1,328,695 2,718,220 4,046,915 423,054 190,579 613,633 2,886,997 1,225,604 4,112,601 2016 1,328,695 2,898,551 4,227,246 423,054 214,470 637,524 2,886,997 1,055,385 3,942,382 2017 1,328,695 3,068,902 4,397,597 423,054 193,281 616,335 3,473,127 1,003,546 4,476,673 2018 1,328,695 3,769,917 5,098,612 423,054 223,765 646,819 3,507,723 948,746 4,456,469 2019 1,328,695 4,159,996 5,488,691 423,054 229,047 652,101 3,507,723 982,574 4,490,297 2020 1,328,695 5,987,410 7,316,105 423,054 457,274 880,328 3,507,723 1,714,155 5,221,878 2021 1,328,695 6,247,663 7,576,358 423,054 477,252 900,306 3,507,723 1,707,571 5,215,294 2022 1,328,695 7,893,562 9,222,257 423,054 636,368 1,059,422 3,507,723 2,589,893 6,097,616 FiscalYearEnded Base Incremental Total Base Incremental Total Base Incremental TotalJune 30,Taxable Taxable Taxable Taxable Taxable Taxable Taxable Taxable Taxable 2013 - - - - - - 2014 417 - 417 - - - 2015 417 3 420 - - - 2016 417 - 417 - - - 2017 417 - 417 - - - 2018 417 - 417 - - - 2019 244,332 20,749 265,081 417 - 417 - - - 2020 244,332 - 244,332 417 - 417 - - - 2021 244,332 13,824 258,156 417 - 417 - - - 2022 244,332 53,750 298,082 417 56,410 417 1,137,056 255,655 1,392,711 Fiscal Year Ended Base Incremental Total June 30,Taxable Taxable Taxable 2007 1,833,875 884,321 2,718,196 2008 8,478,593 1,139,674 9,618,267 2009 8,478,593 1,444,974 9,923,567 2010 7,948,797 3,058,473 11,007,270 2011 7,948,797 3,659,385 11,608,182 2012 7,948,797 4,197,954 12,146,751 2013 4,638,746 3,630,726 8,269,472 2014 4,639,163 3,952,868 8,592,031 2015 4,639,163 4,134,406 8,773,569 2016 4,639,163 4,168,406 8,807,569 2017 5,225,293 4,265,729 9,491,022 2018 5,259,889 4,942,428 10,202,317 Source: Based on information provided by Gallatin County and Montana Department of Revenue 2019 5,504,221 5,392,366 10,896,587 Note: Property is assessed by the State Department of Revenue every two years. 2020 5,504,221 8,158,839 13,663,060 *Previously North 7th Corridor 2021 5,504,221 8,446,310 13,950,531 **New district created in FY19 2022 6,641,277 11,485,638 18,126,915 ***New district created in FY22 TOTAL NORTH PARK URBAN RENEWAL**BOZEMAN TECHNOLOGY POLE YARD URBAN RENEWAL*** BOZEMAN DOWNTOWN NORTHEAST URBAN RENEWAL DISTRICT BOZEMAN MIDTOWN* 512 183 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA DOWNTOWN BOZEMAN IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT & COMPARISON TO CITY TAXABLE VALUE Past Ten Fiscal Years Fiscal Taxable City Taxable Value The District's Year Market Value Taxable Value of Incremental (Excluding ALL tax Incremental Taxable Ended of Property in Property in the Taxable increment district Value as Percentage of June 30,the District District Value valuations)City's Taxable Value 2013 142,099,662 3,724,988 2,396,293 83,226,395 2.88% 2014 153,063,721 3,915,658 2,586,963 85,367,356 3.03% 2015 190,128,511 4,046,915 2,718,220 87,894,541 3.09% 2016 259,138,001 4,227,246 2,898,551 86,564,180 3.35% 2017 265,793,431 4,397,597 3,068,902 89,758,426 3.42% 2018 297,005,720 5,098,612 3,769,917 101,194,775 3.73% 2019 319,728,707 5,488,691 4,159,996 104,321,416 3.99% 2020 447,565,041 7,316,105 5,987,410 125,423,197 4.77% 2021 465,530,358 7,576,358 6,247,663 129,537,117 4.82% 2022 580,867,055 9,222,257 7,893,562 155,352,503 5.08% Source: Based on information provided by Gallatin County and Montana Department of Revenue Note: Property is assessed by the State Department of Revenue every two years. Downtown Bozeman Improvement District 513 184 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA PROPERTY TAX LEVIES FOR TAX INCREMENT/URBAN RENEWAL DISTRICTS Past Ten Fiscal Years Taxing Entity 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Statewide School Equalization 40.00 40.00 40.00 40.00 40.00 40.00 40.00 40.00 40.00 40.00 Gallatin County Operating and Bond 87.40 88.38 89.55 99.77 100.41 91.23 98.87 91.17 99.09 93.48 Open Space Bond 4.89 4.90 4.95 5.03 5.85 5.13 4.69 3.90 3.74 County-Wide School 96.47 101.28 99.94 106.85 105.39 99.67 102.44 96.45 96.74 91.29 Bozeman High School District 71.81 73.16 72.97 76.76 77.25 73.10 108.95 92.77 97.61 84.86 Bozeman Elementary School District 131.45 145.25 143.70 151.15 154.81 146.92 142.63 125.90 121.74 101.99 City of Bozeman 166.75 173.08 188.76 210.16 205.30 187.33 191.24 187.70 169.53 152.12 TOTAL 598.77 626.05 639.87 689.72 689.01 643.38 688.82 637.89 624.71 567.48 Exempt from Tax Increment University Millage 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 Gallatin Conservation District 0.98 0.97 0.95 1.05 1.01 0.89 0.91 0.77 County-Wide Planning 2.39 2.39 2.35 2.39 2.39 2.48 2.50 2.22 1.48 2.18 Source: Based on information provided by Gallatin County and Montana Department of Revenue Note: Property is assessed by the State Department of Revenue every six years and beginning in 2017 every two years. Fiscal Year 514 185 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA DIRECT AND OVERLAPPING PROPERTY TAX RATES Past Ten Fiscal Years (rate per $1,000 of assessed value) Fiscal General Total Year Obligation Direct Bozeman Ended Basic Debt Tax School Gallatin State of June 30,Rate Service Rate District County Montana 2013 158.38 8.37 166.75 203.26 215.10 46.00 2014 164.83 8.25 173.08 218.41 221.00 46.00 2015 177.52 11.24 188.76 216.67 215.78 46.00 2016 194.51 15.65 210.16 227.91 241.69 46.00 2017 190.17 15.13 205.30 232.06 241.69 46.00 2018 173.92 13.41 187.33 220.02 223.33 46.00 2019 178.22 13.02 191.24 251.58 206.00 46.00 2020 162.82 25.63 188.45 218.67 191.52 46.00 2021 140.73 28.75 169.48 219.35 195.83 46.00 2022 131.89 22.23 154.12 186.85 188.51 46.00 Source: Based on information provided by Gallatin County and Department of Revenue 515 186 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA PRINCIPAL PROPERTY TAX PAYERS Current Year and Ten Years Ago Percentage Percentage of Total City of Total City Taxable Taxable Total Taxable Assessed Assessed Assessed Assessed Taxpayer Value Rank Value Value Rank Value Plato MT I Propco LLC 1,155,293 1 0.74% GKT Bozeman Gateway LLC & 623,384 2 0.40% Harry Daum - Gallatin Mall 566,231 3 0.36%508,230 5 0.61% Bozeman Apartment Group LLC 560,417 4 0.36% Springs VII at Bozeman LLC 546,620 5 0.35% Cannery District Partners LLC 543,525 6 0.35% REVESCO (USA) Properties of Bozeman LP 507,025 7 0.33% NB Stadium View DST 503,577 8 0.32%Bridger Peaks Holding LLC 490,057 9 0.32%339,009 8 0.41% Etha Hotel LLC 479,342 10 0.31% J & D Family Limited Partnership 460,240 11 0.30% Stone Ridge Partners LLC 457,351 12 0.29%440,095 6 0.53% 3705 Galloway (Bozeman) LLC 397,252 13 0.26% Crestview Lake LLC 388,538 14 0.25% Costco Wholesale Corporation 360,519 15 0.23% Bridge Embassy House LP 355,114 16 0.23% Bozeman Health Deaconess Hospital 352,905 17 0.23% G25 Holdings LLC 332,967 18 0.21% State of Montana 330,488 19 0.21% Bozeman Main & 15th Ave Shopping Center 323,406 20 0.21% Radiant Properties Bozeman LLC 305,099 21 0.20% Westlake George E 300,665 22 0.19% University Square Bozeman Shopping Center 294,885 23 0.19% Bozeman Hotel Group LLC 294,039 24 0.19% First Security Bank 282,549 25 0.18%342,184 7 0.41% Northwestern Corp Transmission & Distribution 3,476,581 1 4.18% Qwest Corporation 974,616 2 1.17% Bresnan Communications 973,911 3 1.17% Verizon Wireless 543,977 4 0.65% Highgate Bozeman LLC 321,938 9 0.39%BVI/HJSI Bozeman LLC 308,067 10 0.37% Total 11,211,488$ 7.22%8,228,608$ 9.89% Total City Taxable Assessed Value 155,352,503$ 83,226,000$ Source: Gallatin County Treasurer 2022 2013 516 187 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA PRINCIPAL PROPERTY TAX PAYERS IN DOWNTOWN BOZEMAN IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT Current Year and Prior Year Percentage Percentage of Total City of Total City Total Taxable Total Taxable Assessed Assessed Assessed Assessed Taxpayer Business Value Rank Value Value Rank Value ETHA Hotel LLC Property Investor/Developer 479,342 1 5.20%320,008 2 4.22% G25 Holdings LLC Property Investor/Developer 332,967 2 3.61%329,206 1 4.35% First Security Bank Bank 282,549 3 3.06%257,915 3 3.40% 106 East Babcock LLC Multi Tenant Commercial/Residential Buildling 192,174 4 2.08% 5 West LLC Multi Tenant Commercial/Residential Buildling 185,489 5 2.01%167,052 4 2.20% 104 East Main LLC Multi Tenant Commercial/Residential Buildling 161,377 6 1.75% Downtowner Group LLC Business Support Services 150,146 7 1.63%108,936 10 1.44% Osborne Building LLC Multi Tenant Commercial/Residential Buildling 149,770 8 1.62% Moose Point LP Commercial Property Developer 142,399 9 1.54%127,363 6 1.68% F&H, LLC Property Investor/Developer 136,985 10 1.49%141,830 5 1.87% 777 Building Multi Tenant Office Retail Building 133,640 11 1.45%121,198 8 1.60% M & J Cowdrey LLC Property Investor/Developer 121,258 12 1.31%110,165 9 1.45% Total 2,468,096$ 21.56%1,683,673$ 22.22% Total Downtown BID Taxable Assessed Value 9,222,257$ 7,576,358$ 20212022 517 188 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA PROPERTIES IN THE BOZEMAN MIDTWON URBAN RENEWAL DISTRICT Current Year and Prior Year Property Type/Property Tax Assessed Taxable Taxable Classification Value Value Value Rank 3 agricultural land 16,897$ 903$ 15,701$ 840$ 4 residential 41,516,680 556,166 30,048,793 401,331 4 commercial 286,476,924 5,414,414 248,196,606 4,690,928 8 business equipment 3,463,777 51,957 3,593,100 53,897 9 pipelines and non-elec. generating property of elec. Utility 387,383 46,487 407,869 48,946 13 electical generation and telecommunication 461,501 27,689 322,520 19,352 332,323,162$ 6,097,616$ 282,584,589$ 5,215,294$ Source: Montana Department of Revenue 2021/2022 2020/2021 518 189 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA TOP TEN LARGEST TAX PAYERS IN BOZEMAN MIDTOWN URBAN RENEWAL DISTRICT Current Year and Prior Year Percentage Percentage of District of District Taxable Taxable Taxable Taxable Taxpayer Value Value Rank Taxpayer Value Value Westlake, George 300,665$ 3.26%1 Walmart Stores Inc.231,524$ 4.44% TCIP Partnership 264,335 2.87%2 TCIP Partnership 231,375 4.44% Walmart Stores Inc.247,136 2.68%3 Buffalo Ventures 202,857 3.89% Grantree Hotels LP 219,618 2.38%4 Grantree Hotels LP 195,254 3.74% Buffalo Ventures LLC 213,835 2.32%5 Westlake, George 178,653 3.43% Bozeman Hospitality LLC 169,344 1.84%6 Murdoch Family LP 157,935 3.03% Murdoch Family LP 164,113 1.78%7 Bozeman Hospitality LLC 144,021 2.76% Oak Street Partnership 146,997 1.59%8 Oak Street Partnership 132,968 2.55% Gallatin Hospitality LLC 117,399 1.27%9 Universal Athletic Services Inc.112,226 2.15% Universal Athletic Services Inc.112,693 1.22% 10 Gallatin Hospitality LLC 105,134 2.02% 1,956,135$ 21.21%1,691,947$ 32.44% Total Midtown URD Taxable Value 9,222,257$ Total Midtown URD Taxable Value 5,215,294$ Source: Gallatin County Treasurer 2020/20212021/2022 519 190 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA PROPERTY TAX LEVIES AND COLLECTIONS Past Ten Fiscal Years Fiscal Year Taxes Levied Collections Ended for the Percentage in Subsequent Percentage June 30,Fiscal Year Amount of Levy Years Amount of Levy 2013 13,878,293 13,633,347 98.24%204,212 13,837,559 99.71% 2014 14,821,724 14,482,502 97.71%227,481 14,709,983 99.25% 2015 16,590,871 16,559,270 99.81%31,601 16,590,871 100.00% 2016 18,191,892 18,009,556 99.00%74,809 18,084,364 99.41% 2017 18,338,501 18,069,230 98.53%100,003 18,169,233 99.08% 2018 18,956,357 18,791,653 99.13%59,070 18,850,723 99.44% 2019 19,950,675 19,940,784 99.95%9,891 19,950,675 100.00% 2020 23,589,506 23,381,671 99.12%207,835 23,589,506 100.00% 2021 21,454,058 21,017,696 97.97%62,741 21,080,436 98.26% 2022 23,793,072 23,777,644 99.94%- 23,777,644 99.94% Source:Gallatin County City Manager's Final Adopted Budget Collected within the Fiscal Year of the Levy Total Collections to Date 520 191 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA WATER SOLD BY TYPE OF CUSTOMER Past Ten Fiscal Years (in hundreds of cubic feet “HCF”) 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Type of Customer Residential 1,513,986 1,433,833 1,385,140 1,493,192 1,601,439 1,623,881 1,556,249 1,546,308 1,788,984 1,612,932 Government 59,589 52,448 53,165 51,923 56,956 75,001 54,270 103,536 73,416 82,308 MSU 233,484 213,698 210,107 208,618 225,394 217,967 238,968 178,368 171,840 199,080 Commercial 638,337 607,444 599,193 610,741 620,761 618,398 627,116 506,868 590,076 578,688 Total 2,445,396 2,307,423 2,247,605 2,364,474 2,504,550 2,535,247 2,476,603 2,335,080 2,624,316 2,473,008 Total direct rate 2,955.66$ 3,053.40$ 3,105.14$ 3,175.41$ 3,256.72$ 3,337.92$ 3,508.94$ 3,757.07$ 3,697.72$ 4,001.23$ per 1,000 HCF Source: City of Bozeman Finance Department 521 192 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA WATER AND SEWER RATES Past Ten Fiscal Years Fiscal Year Monthly Rate per Monthly Rate per Ended Base 1,000 Base 1,000 June 30,Rate Gallons Rate Gallons 2013 14.65$ 22.95$ 16.55$ 27.42$ 2014 14.65$ 22.95$ 17.56$ 29.10$ 2015 14.65$ 22.95$ 17.56$ 29.10$ 2016 15.02$ 23.53$ 18.09$ 29.98$ 2017 15.39$ 24.11$ 18.63$ 30.87$ 2018 15.70$ 24.60$ 19.01$ 31.50$ 2019 16.17$ 25.33$ 19.58$ 32.45$ 2020 16.17$ 25.33$ 19.58$ 32.45$ 2021 16.17$ 25.33$ 19.58$ 32.45$ 2022 16.17$ 25.33$ 19.58$ 32.45$ * For Residential Customers, using 5/8 inch meter size. Sources:City of Bozeman, Montana Commission Resolution 4327 City of Bozeman, Montana Commission Resolution 4328 City of Bozeman, Montana Commission Resolution 4454 City of Bozeman, Montana Commission Resolution 4626 & 4627 City of Bozeman, Montana Commission Resolution 4819 & 4820 City of Bozeman, Montana Commission Resolution 4927 & 4928 City of Bozeman, Montana Commission Resolution 5065 & 5066 City of Bozeman, Montana Commission Resolution 5273 & 5274 Water Sewer 522 DEBT CAPACITY 523 193 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA RATIOS OF OUTSTANDING DEBT BY TYPE Past Ten Fiscal Years FiscalYear General Sports Special Tax Increment Water Wastewater Stormwater Total Percentage Ended Obligation Bond Notes Capital Park Assessment Financing Revenue State of MT Revenue Capital Primary of Personal Per June 30,Bonds Premiums Payable Leases Loan Payable Bonds Bonds Bonds RLF Loans Bond Leases Government Income Capita 2013 2,445,000 1,198,823 149,892 1,659,500 5,195,000 13,751,878 22,501,119 - - 46,901,212 5.56% 1,210.26$ 2014 11,685,000 1,086,396 94,176 1,185,500 5,015,000 18,140,000 21,025,565 - - 58,231,637 6.83% 1,498.50$ 2015 16,320,000 262,425 963,274 295,912 890,500 4,825,000 17,365,000 19,972,565 229,750 434,598 61,559,024 7.25% 1,477.65$ 2016 15,570,000 248,967 884,844 249,501 662,500 4,630,000 16,567,000 18,930,565 1,440,430 363,749 59,547,556 7.01% 1,371.91$ 2017 14,710,000 235,509 902,500 270,492 501,000 4,425,000 15,760,000 17,856,000 1,367,430 290,538 56,318,469 6.13% 1,244.61$ 2018 13,835,000 222,051 763,588 463,535 406,000 5,018,931 19,107,497 16,368,000 1,292,430 214,887 57,691,919 5.80% 1,238.13$ 2019 12,940,000 208,593 937,009 651,453 1,700,000 171,500 5,338,811 21,001,000 15,229,000 1,520,000 183,591 59,880,957 5.71% 1,233.84$ 2020 45,445,000 3,778,566 781,079 404,043 1,700,000 139,500 4,733,238 19,791,000 14,057,000 1,442,000 71,077 92,342,503 7.22% 1,853.11$ 2021 43,240,000 4,198,474 609,577 310,270 1,637,117 3,948,216 10,763,655 18,547,000 24,582,587 1,362,000 10,585 109,209,481 7.84% 2,049.23$ 2022 47,990,000 4,484,963 750,632 630,917 1,571,950 3,764,217 10,288,570 17,267,000 27,932,231 1,280,000 - 115,960,480 6.82% 2,125.96$ Sources:City Manager's Final Adopted Budget City of Bozeman Finance Department Governmental Activities Business-Type Activities 524 194 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA RATIOS OF GENERAL BONDED DEBT OUTSTANDING Past Ten Fiscal Years Percentage of Fiscal Actual Year General Tax Increment Taxable Ended Obligation Bond Financing District Value of Per June 30,Bonds Premiums Bonds Total Property Capita 2013 2,445,000 5,195,000 7,640,000 9.2%197.15$ 2014 11,685,000 5,015,000 16,700,000 19.5%429.75$ 2015 16,320,000 262,425 4,825,000 21,145,000 24.1%507.56$ 2016 15,570,000 428,967 4,630,000 20,200,000 23.3%465.38$ 2017 14,710,000 235,509 4,425,000 19,135,000 21.3%422.87$ 2018 13,835,000 222,051 4,926,931 18,761,931 18.5%402.65$ 2019 12,940,000 208,593 5,338,811 18,278,811 17.5%376.63$ 2020 45,445,000 3,785,489 4,733,238 50,178,238 40.0%1,006.97$ 2021 43,240,000 4,198,474 10,763,655 54,003,655 41.7%1,013.33$ 2022 47,990,000 4,484,963 10,288,570 58,278,570 37.5%1,068.45$ Source:City Manager's Final Adopted Budget Debt Outstanding is reduced by cash held for bond reserves for the purposes of this table General Bonded Debt Outstanding 525 195 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA DIRECT AND OVERLAPPING GOVERNMENTAL ACTIVITIES DEBT Debt Estimated Outstanding Estimated Share of as of Percentage Overlapping June 30, 2022 Applicable (1)Debt Overlapping Bonded Indebtedness Gallatin County: Various issues outstanding 21,190,000$ 37%7,869,658$ Bozeman School District #7: Various issues outstanding 177,227,316$ 62% 109,739,250$ Subtotal overlapping debt 117,608,908$ City of Bozeman, Montana Direct Debt 64,707,309$ 100% 64,707,309$ Total Direct & Overlapping Debt 182,316,217 Note: Overlapping governments are those that coincide, at least in part, with the geographic boundaries of the City. This schedule estimates the portion of the outstanding debt of those overlapping governments that is borne by the residents and businesses of Bozeman. This process recognizes that, when considering the City's ability to issue and repay long-term debt, the entire debt burden borne by the residents and businesses should be taken into account. However, this does not imply that every taxpayer is a resident, and therefore responsible for repaying the debt, of each overlapping government. (1) The percentage of overlapping debt applicable is estimated using taxable assessed property values. Applicable percentages were estimated by determining the portion of another governmental unit's taxable assessed value that is within the City's boundaries and dividing it by each entity's total taxable assessed value. Sources: City of Bozeman Finance Department Gallatin County Assessor's Office Bozeman School District #7 526 196 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA LEGAL DEBT MARGIN INFORMATION Past Ten Fiscal Years 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Debt limit*76,450,000 84,657,000 84,500,000 142,464,717 147,500,000 168,633,783 174,548,585 214,906,344 221,894,059 268,114,122 Total net debt applicable to limit (10,648,215)$ (19,066,072)$ (23,557,111)$ (22,245,812)$ (21,044,501)$ (20,709,105)$ (21,947,366)$ (56,981,426)$ (64,707,309)$ (69,481,249)$ Legal debt margin 65,801,785$ 65,590,928$ 60,942,889$ 120,218,905$ 126,455,499$ 147,924,678$ 152,601,219$ 157,924,918$ 157,186,750$ 198,632,874$ Total net debt applicable to the limit 13.9% 22.5% 27.9% 15.6% 14.3% 12.3% 12.6% 26.5% 29.2% 25.9% as a percentage of debt limit *2.5% of total market value of taxable property of $8.6 Billion per MCA 2019 7-7-4201 Source: City Manager's Final Adopted Budget Fiscal Years 527 197 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA PLEDGED REVENUE COVERAGE Past Ten Fiscal Years Fiscal Year Utility Less:Special Ended Service Operating Assessment June 30,Charges Expenses Principal Interest Coverage Collections Principal Interest Coverage 2013 7,806,922 (4,364,506) (502,000) (163,250) 2,777,166 820,090 (650,975) (103,198) 65,917 2014 7,871,386 (4,405,464) (751,000) (429,438) 2,285,484 1,054,483 (474,000) (73,760) 506,723 2015 7,748,913 (4,973,926) (775,000) (538,425) 1,461,562 586,116 (295,000) (50,070) 241,046 2016 8,414,870 (6,176,752) (798,000) (515,010) 925,108 705,143 (228,000) (39,343) 437,800 2017 9,281,821 (6,589,396) (822,000) (490,890) 1,379,535 558,988 (161,500) (30,335) 367,153 2018 10,157,888 (6,494,121) (1,141,000) (530,881) 1,991,886 506,819 (95,000) (23,221) 388,598 2019 9,396,171 (6,525,730) (1,176,000) (578,954) 1,115,487 518,351 (234,500) (18,740) 265,111 2020 9,852,377 (6,848,489) (1,210,000) (587,350) 1,206,538 775,230 (32,000) (26,434) 716,796 2021 11,027,542 (6,878,458) (1,244,000) (552,156) 2,352,928 975,387 (192,284) (135,114) 647,989 2022 11,613,448 (7,868,703) (1,280,000) (515,842) 1,948,903 901,483 (183,999) (135,136) 582,348 Fiscal Year Utility Less: Ended Service Operating June 30,Charges Expenses Principal Interest Coverage 2012 6,385,404 (3,784,420) (883,000) (857,842) 860,142 2013 6,916,226 (3,947,821) (1,465,227) (847,778) 655,400 2014 7,204,486 (5,895,751) (1,084,854) (660,771) (436,890) 2015 7,631,117 (3,914,454) (1,053,000) (632,268) 2,031,395 2016 7,927,692 (5,139,029) (1,042,000) (552,269) 1,194,394 2017 8,566,893 (5,496,164) (1,074,565) (545,267) 1,450,897 2018 8,876,017 (5,158,989) (1,104,000) (513,009) 2,100,019 2019 9,336,007 (6,348,468) (1,139,000) (479,859) 1,368,680 2020 9,441,675 (6,592,798) (1,172,000) (446,064) 1,230,813 2021 9,926,730 (6,329,624) (1,760,000) (581,214) 1,255,892 2022 10,389,216 (6,607,192) (1,951,000) (729,704) 1,101,320 Waste Water Revenue Bonds Debt Service Water Revenue Bonds Special Assessment Bonds Debt Service Debt Service 528 198 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA DEBT SERVICE REQUIREMENTS AND COVERAGE FOR TAX INCREMENT DISTRICTS Past Ten Fiscal Years Fiscal Year Revenues Annual Revenues Annual Ended Available Debt Service Available Debt Service June 30,for Debt Service Payment Coverage for Debt Service Payment Coverage 2013 1,497,572 425,088 3.52 - - - 2014 1,644,960 423,088 3.89 - - - 2015 1,853,725 425,888 4.35 - - - 2016 2,066,749 423,288 4.88 - - - 2017 2,160,187 425,488 5.08 - - - 2018 2,430,377 422,288 5.76 149,580 92,000 1.63 2019 2,150,531 423,573 5.08 164,252 95,000 1.73 2020 1,803,534 447,987 4.03 289,196 92,000 3.14 2021 1,847,752 332,448 5.56 470,096 92,000 5.11 2022 1,483,518 332,372 4.46 397,037 92,000 4.32 Fiscal Year Revenues Annual Ended Available Debt Service June 30,for Debt Service Payment Coverage 2013 - - - 2014 - - - 2015 - - - 2016 - - - 2017 - - - 2018 - - - 2019 - - - 2020 - - - 2021 1,118,930 401,893 2.78 2022 1,701,529 408,550 4.16 **$6,500,000 Bond issuance for the Northeast Urban Renewal District on 7/9/2020 MIDTOWN IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT DOWNTOWN IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NORTHEAST URBAN RENEWAL DISTRICT **$863,000 Bond issuance for the Northeast Urban Renewal District on 7/20/2017 529 199 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA SUMMARY OF OUTSTANDING SIDs Current Fiscal Year Bond Original Maturity Bonds Cash Assessments Delinquent Issue Amount Date Outstanding Balance Outstanding Assessments SID 674 494,000$ 7/1/2024 73,500$ 12,107$ 48,612$ 326$ SID 747 4,001,000 7/1/2040 3,690,717 8,742 2,954,834 4,871 TOTAL 4,495,000$ 3,764,217$ 20,848$ 3,003,446$ 5,197$ As of June 30, 2022 530 200 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA REVOLVING FUND BALANCE AND BOND SECURED THEREBY Past Ten Fiscal Years Fiscal Year Ended Revolving Fund Principal June 30,Cash Balance Amount of Debt 2013 2,443,769 1,803,029 2014 2,474,971 1,317,226 2015 2,948,129 1,295,224 2016 2,924,604 1,120,708 2017 2,874,013 1,040,533 2018 2,903,817 916,503 2019 3,020,315 643,983 2020 2,173,692 1,537,286 2021 2,555,927 1,152,898 2022 766,881 766,510 531 201 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT ASSESSMENT BILLING AND COLLECTIONS Past Ten Fiscal Years Fiscal Assessment Total Annual Year Billing Collections 2013 741,886 820,090 2014 676,613 1,054,484 2015 538,697 586,116 2016 543,351 705,143 2017 528,622 558,988 2018 505,481 506,819 2019 476,212 518,351 2020 642,408 703,796 2021 594,719 649,643 2022 578,154 599,831 532 DEMOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC INFORMATION 533 202 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA DEMOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC STATISTICS Past Ten Fiscal Years Fiscal Estimated Per Residents (25 & over) Year Annual %Capita Median with Bachelors Pre K-12 Ended Change in Personal Personal Age Degree or School Unemployment June 30,Population Population Income Income (years)Higher Schooling Enrollment Rate 2013 38,753 1.6% 843,399,480$ 25,608$ 27.1 55.4% 5,994 4.3% 2014 38,860 0.3% 852,165,042$ 26,427$ 26.8 53.3% 6,216 3.5% 2015 41,660 6.7% 849,198,410$ 26,335$ 27.3 53.6% 6,294 2.9% 2016 43,405 4.0% 849,682,100$ 26,350$ 27.5 54.4% 6,533 2.8% 2017 45,250 4.1% 918,565,430$ 26,506$ 27.7 56.5% 6,770 2.8% 2018 46,596 2.9% 993,940,022$ 28,748$ 27.9 55.6% 6,908 2.8% 2019 48,532 4.0% 1,047,804,618$ 29,097$ 28 56.9% 7,015 3.8% 2020 49,831 2.6% 1,279,025,432$ 30,268$ 28 56.8% 7,152 4.5% 2021 53,293 6.5% 1,393,673,190$ 32,865$ 28 58.7% 6,893 3.2% 2022 54,545 2.3% 1,700,066,144$ 36,526$ 29 63.1% 7,308 2.1% Sources: Bozeman Public Schools U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics U.S. Census Bureau 534 203 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA PRINCIPAL EMPLOYERS FOR GALLATIN COUNTY Current Year and Ten Years Ago Private Employer Private Employer Employers Class Employers Class By Class Size By Class Size Bozeman Deaconess Hospital 9 Bozeman Deaconess Hospital 9 Oracle America 7 Oracle America 7 Kenyon Noble Lumber & Hardware 7 Wal-Mart 7 Town Pump Convenience Stores 7 Albertson's 6 Wal Mart 7 Bridger Bowl 6 Zoot Enterprises 6 Community Food Co-Op 6 Albertson's 6 Costco 6 Target 6 First Security Bank 6 Bridger Bowl 6 First Student 6 Community Food Co-Op 6 Gibson Guitar 6 Costco 6 Kenyon Noble Lumber & Hardware 6 Glacier Bancorp 6 Martel Construction 6 First Student 6 McDonalds 6 McDonalds 6 Murdoch's Ranch & Home Supply 6 Murdoch's Ranch & Home Supply 6 Ressler Motor 6 Ressler Motors 6 Rosauers 6 Rosauers Food & Drug 6 Target 6 Town & Country Foods 6 Town & Country Foods 6 UPS 6 Town Pump Convenience Stores 6 Williams Plumbing & Heating 6 Zoot Enterprises 6 Public Employer Public Employer Employers Class Employers Class By Class Size By Class Size Montana State University 9 Montana State University 9 Belgrade School District 8 School District #7 9 Bozeman School District 8 Belgrade School District 8 Gallatin County 8 City of Bozeman 7 City of Bozeman 7 Department of Agriculture 7 Gallatin County 7 Class 6 - 100 to 249 Employees Class 7 - 250 to 499 Employees Class 8 - 500 to 999 Employees Class 9 - 1,000+ Employees Source: Montana Department of Labor & Industry 2022 2013 June June 535 OPERATING INFORMATION 536 204 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA FULL-TIME EQUIVALENT CITY GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES BY FUNCTION / PROGRAM Past Ten Fiscal Years 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 General GovernmentCity Commission 2.10 2.10 2.10 2.10 2.10 0.10 2.10 2.10 2.10 2.10 City Manager 8.00 5.00 5.00 6.00 6.00 9.00 9.00 9.00 9.00 9.00Municipal Court 8.50 8.50 9.00 8.50 8.50 9.50 9.50 9.60 9.98 11.23 City Attorney 7.00 7.00 9.00 10.20 10.20 10.70 10.70 11.70 12.70 12.70Administrative Services - 19.00 21.00 21.50 23.50 - - - - - Human Resources 4.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 Finance *11.00 - - - - 12.50 13.50 13.50 15.00 14.00 Information Technology *6.00 - - - - 6.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 8.00 Community Development 9.00 8.00 12.60 11.60 13.00 13.00 14.25 15.25 15.25 18.25 Facilities Management 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 4.50 5.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 Total General Government 55.10 53.10 62.20 63.40 66.80 69.30 76.05 78.15 82.03 87.28 Public Safety Police Department 72.75 72.75 72.25 71.70 72.70 72.70 74.55 75.55 76.95 80.95Fire Department 43.75 45.75 45.00 46.00 46.00 46.00 47.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 Building Inspection 10.55 12.55 14.00 18.50 18.50 19.50 19.75 19.75 19.75 19.75Parking4.50 5.50 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 Total Public Safety 131.55 136.55 137.25 142.20 143.20 144.20 147.30 151.30 152.70 156.70 Public ServicesPublic Services Administration / Engineering 10.00 12.00 6.58 10.25 11.50 11.50 16.25 18.25 22.25 26.25 Streets 17.62 18.62 16.20 18.85 19.85 21.85 21.35 22.30 22.30 22.30Storm Water 1.00 1.00 4.00 6.25 6.50 7.50 7.50 8.50 9.50 9.50 Water Conservation 2.25 3.00 3.00 3.00Water Treatment Plant 9.77 11.27 12.75 10.50 10.50 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 Water Operations 15.62 15.62 17.33 14.45 14.45 14.50 14.50 15.70 15.65 16.65Wastewater Operations 10.25 11.25 13.09 13.30 14.05 12.00 12.50 13.55 14.55 14.55 Wastewater Plant 16.37 17.47 15.50 14.75 14.75 15.00 15.00 16.00 16.00 16.00Solid Waste Collection/Recycling 15.74 15.74 15.90 15.15 16.15 17.15 17.15 18.75 19.75 19.75 Vehicle Maintenance 5.00 5.00 5.00 6.50 6.50 7.50 7.50 8.50 8.50 9.50Total Public Services 101.37 107.97 106.35 110.00 114.25 117.00 124.00 134.55 141.50 147.50 Public Welfare Cemetery (numerous short terms)3.33 3.33 4.90 5.04 5.04 4.75 4.25 4.25 4.55 4.55Parks (numerous short terms)11.77 11.77 15.40 14.51 14.51 14.90 18.00 18.00 19.75 19.75 Forestry 4.60 4.60 5.95 5.65 6.65 5.20 6.00 6.00 6.65 6.65Library21.56 23.11 23.41 26.02 28.02 28.02 28.02 28.02 26.53 26.53 Recreation (numerous short terms)15.83 16.83 16.83 23.55 24.26 23.41 24.80 24.80 21.90 21.90Economic Development 2.00 4.00 3.50 3.50 3.50 2.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 Sustainability 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 3.00Total Public Welfare 59.09 65.14 71.49 79.77 83.48 79.78 84.57 85.57 83.88 85.38 Total of all Funds 347.11 362.76 377.29 395.37 407.73 410.28 431.92 449.57 460.11 476.86 Source: City Manager's Final Adopted Budget * Administrative Services was created in fiscal year 2014 and consists of Finance, Information Technology and Human Resources Fiscal Years 537 205 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA OPERATING INDICATORS BY FUNCTION / PROGRAM Past Ten Fiscal Years 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022Finance SID Statements 16,200 16,424 16,506 16,893 17,200 17,463 18,185 18,552 18,895 19,655 Utility Bills 138,000 155,000 162,000 166,000 169,000 172,000 168,280 176,263 180,720 205,092 Accounts Payable Checks Processed 12,519 10,453 11,098 11,000 11,800 12,350 11,762 11,800 12,488 10,543 PoliceNumber of Officers 63 63 61 60 61 60 60 60 60 60 Calls for Service 47,361 48,542 46,290 47,400 48,200 47,136 50,548 48,099 48,560 69,857 Arrests 2,096 2,165 2,195 2,078 2,427 2,314 2,618 2,017 2,118 1,936 Misdemeanor Citations Issued - includes traffic 5,205 6,045 6,169 6,390 5,886 4,940 5,430 4,800 4,058 4,012 Traffic Stops 10,629 8,210 7,757 7,482 7,900 7,675 9,600 8,410 8,736 8,062 Traffic Crashes 1,320 1,469 1,601 1,792 1,850 1,958 1,840 1,813 1,351 1,452 Fire*Fires, Hazardous Conditions & Rupture/Explosions 309 340 296 349 445 564 522 340 304 319 Emergency Medical Services/Rescue 1,941 2,051 2,032 2,424 3,062 3,320 3,073 3,154 3,005 2,716 Service Calls 145 212 202 244 334 438 406 239 170 311 Building InspectionCommercial Permits: Number 1,305 1,165 1,560 1,628 1,731 883 768 702 707 548 Value (Millions)69.64 $44.50 $98.02 $164.47 $65 $216 $249 $302 $237 $201Residential Permits: Number 2,338 2,911 2,836 3,937 3,905 3,222 2,307 2,094 2,674 1,947 Value (Millions)146.32 $130.68 $191.97 $200 $130 $340 $311 $176 $233 $479WaterNew Service Main Taps 41 57 70 60 72 65 101 96 100 60Meter Replacement/Repair 113 479 1006 978 1500 994 1042 528 1273 1285Water Main Breaks/Repairs 4 7 5 7 6 7 5 11 14 9WastewaterMain Line Flushing (in Miles)47 30 90 50 30.9 50 37.5 48 33.3 73.7New Infrastructure TV (in Miles)2.6 2 8 2.6 9.9 7 2.8 3.3 7.4 6.77New Service Taps 17 37 44 20 30 30 56 25 34 19Solid Waste Collection & RecyclingResidential Accounts 7,470 7,869 8,369 8,878 9,695 10,384 10,884 11,321 11,841 12,317 Commercial Customers 265 258 265 461 449 515 573 566 520 612 Recycling Customers 1,135 1,601 2,100 2,663 3,386 3,854 4,434 4,867 5,526 6,025 Annual Tonnage Collected: Collections Program 10,695 10,960 11,457 11,691 12,490 17,657 18,880 19,815 19,955 21,369 Vehicle MaintenanceWork Orders Processed 1,646 1,717 1,549 1,453 1,509 2,592 2,392 2,057 3,718 1,802 Gallons of Oil Disposed 8,640 8,740 8,969 7,395 6,475 5,007 5,522 4,900 5,787 2,925 ParksPark Reservations 350 400 400 400 400 425 493 423 912 1,433 Sources: City Manager's Final Adopted Budget City of Bozeman Finance Department *Statistics are based on calendar year Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 538 206 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA CAPITAL ASSET STATISTICS BY FUNCTION / PROGRAM Past Ten Fiscal Years 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Police Stations 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Patrol Units (Cars)*20 20 22 21 21 22 21 21 24 20 Patrol Units (Motorcycles)4 4 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Fire Stations 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Fire Trucks 6 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 Streets Street & Alley Mileage 256 259 262 266 267 271 275 280 282 286 Lane Miles Painted 37 35 49 50 50 52 48 53 51 51 Number of Signs Installed/Repaired 669 798 600 600 600 708 394 1107 1270 273 Water Water Mains (Miles)264.61 267.28 268.57 274.89 276.92 283.95 286.68 297.10 299.52 304.53 Fire Hydrants 2,388 2,406 2,419 2,511 2,573 2,618 2,668 2,758 2,782 2,835 Wastewater Sanitary Sewers (Miles)210.22 211.51 212.53 219.14 224.28 234.64 236.04 239.00 242.43 254.14 Number of Manholes 4,154 4,185 4,219 4,360 4,492 4,614 4,677 4,828 5,023 5,051 Solid Waste Number of Collection Vehicles 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 6 6 8 Number of Roll-off Trucks 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 Number of Recycling Trucks 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Number of Compost Collection Trucks 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 Parks Formal Turf Acres 125 125 126 140 140 172 192 192 192 196.3 Natural Parkland Acres 220 220 220 220 220 323 343 388 413 413 Miles of Trails 55 61 63 63 63 63 65 65 65 71.1 Sources: City Manager's Final Adopted Budget City of Bozeman Finance Department City of Bozeman GIS Department City of Bozeman Police Department *Patrol cars determined by Vehicle & Equipment Master List-Fire Extinguishers tab-Total of "Utility" & "Interceptor" vehicles Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 539 PART IV SINGLE AUDIT SECTION 540 207 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA SCHEDULE OF EXPENDITURES OF FEDERAL AWARDS Year Ended June 30, 2022 Federal Awards Assistance Listing Pass Through Grant Total Awards to FEDERAL GRANTOR Number Grantors Number Award Revenue Expended Subrecipients U.S. Department of Agriculture Cooperative Forestry Assistance 10.664 FHE-21-101 290,000$ 285,584$ 285,584$ -$ U.S. Department of Justice Passed through Gallatin County: Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program:Missouri River Drug Task Force 16.738 2990-000-42-420142-000-400-790 72,716 72,716 72,716 - Rural Domestic Violence, Dating Violence, Sexual Assault, and Stalking Assistance Program 16.589 2018-WR-AX-0002 523,712 26,301 26,301 - Drug Court Discretionary Grant Program: Implementation 16.585 2017-VV-BX-0006 400,000 35,199 35,199 - Bullet-Proof Vest Program 16.607 N/A 8,788 8,788 8,788 - COVID-19 Coronavirus Emergency Supplemental Funding 16.034 2020-VD-BX-1066 60,489 17,193 13,252 - Total U.S. Department of Justice 1,065,705 160,197 156,256 - Office of National Drug Control Policy Passed through the University of Baltimore: Combating Opioid Overdose through Community-level Intervention Initiative (COOCLI)95.007 G1999ONDCP06A 27,646 13,823 13,823 - U.S. Department of the TreasuryCOVID-19 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds 21.027 N/A 12,767,081 1,013,635 1,013,635 35,000 Passed through the State of Montana: COVID-19 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds 21.027 N/A 2,554,895 1,110,307 1,110,307 - Total U.S. Department of Treasury 15,321,976 2,123,942 2,123,942 35,000 U.S. Department of Transportation Passed through MT Dept. of Transportation: Highway Traffic Safety State and Community Highway Safety 20.600 00-03-09-02 1,173 1,173 1,173 - National Priority Safety Programs 20.616 00-03-09-02 1,635 1,635 1,635 - Passed through Historical Society: Historic Preservation Grants in Aid 15.904 N/A 6,000 6,000 6,000 - Total U.S. Department of Transportation 8,808 8,808 8,808 - Total Federal Financial Assistance 16,714,135$ 2,592,354$ 2,588,413$ 35,000$ 541 208 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA NOTES TO THE SCHEDULE OF EXPENDITURES OF FEDERAL AWARDS Year Ended June 30, 2022 NOTE 1. BASIS OF PRESENTATION The accompanying Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (the Schedule) includes federal award activity of the City under programs of the federal government for the year ended June 30, 2022. The information in this Schedule is presented in accordance with the requirements of Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance). Because the Schedule presents only a select portion of the operations of the City, it is not intended to, and does not present, the financial position, changes in net assets, or cash flows of the City. NOTE 2. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLES The Schedule has been prepared on the accrual basis of accounting, which is the method of accounting used for the financial statements. Such expenditures are recognized following Uniform Guidance, wherein certain types of expenditures are not allowable or are limited as to reimbursement. Negative amounts shown on the Schedule present adjustments or credits made in the normal course of business to amounts reported as expenditures in prior years. NOTE 3. INDIRECT COST RATE The City has elected not to use the optional 10 percent de minimis indirect cost rate allowed by Uniform Guidance. NOTE 4. MATCHING The City has not expended matching contributions during the year ended June 30, 2022. NOTE 5. LOAN AND LOAN GUARANTEES The City has no direct loan guarantees at June 30, 2022. 542 209 INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING AND ON COMPLIANCE AND OTHER MATTERS BASED ON AN AUDIT OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNMENT AUDITING STANDARDS Honorable Mayor, City Commissioners, and City Manager of the City of Bozeman, Montana We have audited, in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards issued by the Comptroller General of the United States, the financial statements of the governmental activities, the business-type activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of City of Bozeman, Montana (the City), as of and for the year ended June 30, 2022, which collectively comprise the City’s basic financial statements and have issued our report thereon, dated December 19, 2022. Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting In planning and performing our audit of the financial statements, we considered the City of Bozeman’s internal control over financial reporting (internal control) as a basis for designing the audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances for the purpose of expressing our opinions on the financial statements, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the City’s internal control. Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on the effectiveness of the City’s internal control. A deficiency in internal control exists when the design or operation of a control does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent, or detect and correct, misstatements on a timely basis. A material weakness is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of the entity’s financial statements will not be prevented, or detected and corrected, on a timely basis. A significant deficiency is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control that is less severe than a material weakness, yet important enough to merit attention by those charged with governance. Our consideration of internal control was for the limited purpose described in the first paragraph of this section and was not designed to identify all deficiencies in internal control that might be material weaknesses or significant deficiencies. Given these limitations, during our audit we did not identify any deficiencies in internal control that we consider to be material weaknesses. However, material weaknesses may exist that were not identified. 543 210 Report on Compliance and Other Matters As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether City of Bozeman’s financial statements are free of material misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the determination of financial statement amounts. However, providing an opinion on compliance with those provisions was not an objective of our audit, and accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. The results of our tests disclosed no instances of noncompliance or other matters that are required to be reported under Government Auditing Standards. Purpose of this Report The purpose of this report is solely to describe the scope of our testing of internal control and compliance, and the results of that testing, and not to provide an opinion on the effectiveness of the entity’s internal control or on compliance. This report is an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards in considering the entity’s internal control and compliance. Accordingly, this communication is not suitable for any other purpose. Bozeman, Montana December 19, 2022 544 211 INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT ON COMPLIANCE FOR EACH MAJOR PROGRAM AND ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER COMPLIANCE REQUIRED BY THE UNIFORM GUIDANCE Honorable Mayor, City Commissioners, and City Manager of the City of Bozeman, Montana Report on Compliance for Each Major Federal Program Opinion on Each Major Federal Program We have audited the City of Bozeman, Montana (the City)’s compliance with the types of compliance requirements identified as subject to audit in the OMB Compliance Supplement that could have a direct and material effect on each of the City’s major federal programs for the year ended June 30, 2022. The City’s major federal programs are identified in the summary of auditor’s results section of the accompanying schedule of findings and questioned costs. In our opinion, the City of Bozeman, complied, in all material respects, with the types of compliance requirements referred to above that could have a direct and material effect on each of its major federal programs for the year ended June 30, 2022. Basis for Opinion on Each Major Federal Program We conducted our audit of compliance in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America; the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States; and the audit requirements of Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance). Our responsibilities under those standards and the Uniform Guidance are further described in the Auditor’s Responsibilities for the Audit of Compliance section of our report. We are required to be independent of the City and to meet our other ethical responsibilities, in accordance with relevant ethical requirements relating to our audit. We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our opinion on compliance for each major federal program. Our audit does not provide a legal determination of the City’s compliance with the compliance requirements referred to above. Responsibilities of Management for Compliance Management is responsible for compliance with the requirements referred to above and for the design, implementation, and maintenance of effective internal control over compliance with the requirements of laws, statutes, regulations, rules, and provisions of contracts or grant agreements applicable to the City’s federal programs. 545 212 Auditor’s Responsibilities for the Audit of Compliance Our objectives are to obtain reasonable assurance about whether material noncompliance with the compliance requirements referred to above occurred, whether due to fraud or error, and express an opinion on the City’s compliance based on our audit. Reasonable assurance is a high level of assurance but is not absolute assurance and therefore is not a guarantee that an audit conducted in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, Government Auditing Standards, and the Uniform Guidance will always detect material noncompliance when it exists. The risk of not detecting material noncompliance resulting from fraud is higher than for that resulting from error, as fraud may involve collusion, forgery, intentional omissions, misrepresentations, or the override of internal control. Noncompliance with the compliance requirements referred to above is considered material if there is a substantial likelihood that, individually or in the aggregate, it would influence the judgment made by a reasonable user of the report on compliance about the City’s compliance with the requirements of each major federal program as a whole. In performing an audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, Government Auditing Standards, and the Uniform Guidance, we: • Exercise professional judgment and maintain professional skepticism throughout the audit. • Identify and assess the risks of material noncompliance, whether due to fraud or error, and design and perform audit procedures responsive to those risks. Such procedures include examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the City’s compliance with the compliance requirements referred to above and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. • Obtain an understanding of the City’s internal control over compliance relevant to the audit in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances and to test and report on internal control over compliance in accordance with the Uniform Guidance, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the City’s internal control over compliance. Accordingly, no such opinion is expressed. We are required to communicate with those charged with governance regarding, among other matters, the planned scope and timing of the audit and any significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in internal control over compliance that we identified during the audit. Report on Internal Control over Compliance A deficiency in internal control over compliance exists when the design or operation of a control over compliance does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent, or detect and correct, noncompliance with a type of compliance requirement of a federal program on a timely basis. A material weakness in internal control over compliance is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control over compliance, such that there is a reasonable possibility that material noncompliance with a type of compliance requirement of a federal program will not be prevented, or detected and corrected, on a timely basis. A significant deficiency in internal control over compliance is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control over compliance with a type of compliance requirement of a federal program that is less severe than a material weakness in internal control over compliance, yet important enough to merit attention by those charged with governance. 546 213 Our consideration of internal control over compliance was for the limited purpose described in the Auditor’s Responsibilities for the Audit of Compliance section above and was not designed to identify all deficiencies in internal control over compliance that might be material weaknesses or significant deficiencies in internal control over compliance. Given these limitations, during our audit we did not identify any deficiencies in internal control over compliance that we consider to be material weaknesses, as defined above. However, material weaknesses or significant deficiencies in internal control over compliance may exist that were not identified. The purpose of this report on internal control over compliance is solely to describe the scope of our testing of internal control over compliance and the results of that testing based on the requirements of the Uniform Guidance. Accordingly, this report is not suitable for any other purpose. Bozeman, Montana December 19, 2022 547 214 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS Year Ended June 30, 2022 Section I - Summary of Auditor’s Results Financial Statements Type of auditor’s report issued: Unmodified Internal control over financial reporting: Material weakness identified? No Significant deficiencies identified not considered to be material weaknesses? None reported Noncompliance material to financial statements noted? No Federal Awards Internal control over major programs: Material weakness identified? No Significant deficiencies identified not considered to be material weaknesses? None reported Type of auditor’s report issued on compliance for major programs: Unmodified Any audit findings disclosed that are required to be reported in accordance with Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance)? No Identification of Major Programs: 21.027 COVID-19 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Dollar threshold used to distinguish between Type A and Type B programs: $750,000 Auditee qualified as low-risk auditee? Yes 548 215 CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (CONTINUED) Year Ended June 30, 2022 Section II – Financial Statement Findings None Reported. Section III – Federal Award Finding and Questioned Costs None Reported. Status of Prior Year Financial Statement Findings: None Reported. Status of Prior Year Federal Award Findings and Questioned Costs: None Reported. 549 azworld.com MEMBER: AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS 550 - 1 - To the Board of City Commissioners City of Bozeman, Montana Bozeman, Montana We have audited the financial statements of the governmental activities, the business-type activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of the City of Bozeman (the City) for the year ended June 30, 2022. Professional standards require that we provide you with information about our responsibilities under generally accepted auditing standards, Government Auditing Standards, and the Uniform Guidance, as well as certain information related to the planned scope and timing of our audit. We have communicated such information in our letter to you dated October 4, 2022. Professional standards also require that we communicate to you the following information related to our audit. Significant Audit Matters Qualitative Aspects of Accounting Practices Management is responsible for the selection and use of appropriate accounting policies. The significant accounting policies used by the City are described in Note 1 to the financial statements. As described in Note 1 to the financial statements, the City adopted the following new accounting policies in 2022: • GASB Statement No. 87, Leases Implementation of this statement had no effect on prior reported net position. We noted no transactions entered into by the City during the year for which there is a lack of authoritative guidance or consensus. All significant transactions have been recognized in the financial statements in the proper period. Accounting estimates are an integral part of the financial statements prepared by management and are based on management’s knowledge and experience about past and current events and assumptions about future events. Certain accounting estimates are particularly sensitive because of their significance to the financial statements and because of the possibility that future events affecting them may differ significantly from those expected. The most sensitive estimates affecting the financial statements were: (i) valuation of the solvent site remediation liability in the waste water fund, which is based on an engineer’s projection of the long term costs; (ii) valuation of post-closure costs for the landfill, which is based on an engineer’s estimate of landfill post-closure care costs; (iii) depreciation expense, which is based on management’s estimate of useful lives of fixed assets; (iv) the liability for the other post-employment benefits which is based on an actuarial study; and (v) the liability for net pension costs which is based on actuarial studies of the respective plans. We evaluated the key factors and assumptions used to develop these estimates in determining that they are reasonable in relation to the financial statements taken as a whole. 551 - 2 - Certain financial statement disclosures are particularly sensitive because of their significance to financial statement users. The most sensitive disclosures affecting the financial statements were the disclosure of Pension in Note 15 to the financial statements and the disclosure of Other Post Employment Benefit in Note 16 to the financial statements. The financial statement disclosures are neutral, consistent, and clear. Difficulties Encountered in Performing the Audit We encountered no significant difficulties in dealing with management in performing and completing our audit. Corrected and Uncorrected Misstatements Professional standards require us to accumulate all known and likely misstatements identified during the audit, other than those that are clearly trivial, and communicate them to the appropriate level of management. We noted no such adjustments. Disagreements with Management For purposes of this letter, a disagreement with management is a financial accounting, reporting, or auditing matter, whether or not resolved to our satisfaction, that could be significant to the financial statements or the auditor’s report. We are pleased to report that no such disagreements arose during the course of our audit. Management Representations We have requested certain representations from management that are included in the management representation letter dated December 19, 2022. Management Consultations with Other Independent Accountants In some cases, management may decide to consult with other accountants about auditing and accounting matters, similar to obtaining a “second opinion” on certain situations. If a consultation involves application of an accounting principle to the City’s financial statements or a determination of the type of auditor’s opinion that may be expressed on those statements, our professional standards require the consulting accountant to check with us to determine that the consultant has all the relevant facts. To our knowledge, there were no such consultations with other accountants. Other Audit Findings or Issues We generally discuss a variety of matters, including the application of accounting principles and auditing standards, with management each year prior to retention as the City’s auditors. However, these discussions occurred in the normal course of our professional relationship and our responses were not a condition to our retention. 552 - 3 - Other Matters We applied certain limited procedures to the Management’s Discussion and Analysis, the Budgetary Comparison – General Fund and Special Revenue Major Funds, Schedule of Changes in Total OPEB Liability and Related Ratios, and the Schedule of Proportionate Share of Net Pension Liability and Schedule of Contributions, and the related notes, which are required supplementary information (RSI) that supplements the basic financial statements. Our procedures consisted of inquiries of management regarding the methods of preparing the information and comparing the information for consistency with management’s responses to our inquiries, the basic financial statements, and other knowledge we obtained during our audit of the basic financial statements. We did not audit the RSI and do not express an opinion or provide any assurance on the RSI. We were engaged to report on the Combining Fund Statements and other Budgetary Comparison Reports, and the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards which accompany the financial statements but are not RSI. With respect to this supplementary information, we made certain inquiries of management and evaluated the form, content, and methods of preparing the information to determine that the information complies with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, the method of preparing it has not changed from the prior period, and the information is appropriate and complete in relation to our audit of the financial statements. We compared and reconciled the supplementary information to the underlying accounting records used to prepare the financial statements or to the financial statements themselves. We were not engaged to report on the Introductory or Statistical Sections, which accompany the financial statements but are not RSI. Such information has not been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements, and accordingly, we do not express an opinion or provide any assurance on it. On the Horizon As part of our responsibility as your independent auditor, we attempt to bring to your attention observations and suggestions to assist you in managing the continued growth in the Entity. In the past year, there were several accounting standards finalized by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB). The following describes those upcoming accounting standard changes effective in fiscal year 2023 that may have an effect on how the City will report its activity. • Statement No. 91, Conduit Debt Obligations • Statement No. 94, Public-Private and Public-Public Partnerships and Availability Payment Arrangements • Statement No. 96, Subscription-Based Information Technology Arrangements 553 - 4 - Restriction on Use This information is intended solely for the use of the Board of City Commissioners and management of the City and is not intended to be, and should not be, used by anyone other than these specified parties. Bozeman, Montana December 19, 2022 554 Memorandum REPORT TO:City Commission FROM:Addi Jadin, Park Planning and Development Manager Mitch Overton, Director of Parks and Recreation Chuck Winn, Assistant City Manager SUBJECT:Parks, Recreation, and Active Transportation Plan Work Session MEETING DATE:February 14, 2023 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Plan/Report/Study RECOMMENDATION:N/A STRATEGIC PLAN:6.5 Parks, Trails & Open Space: Support the maintenance and expansion of an interconnected system of parks, trails and open spaces. BACKGROUND:In early 2021, staff and the Recreation and Parks Advisory Board (RPAB) began the effort to commence the revision of the city's comprehensive plan for parks, recreation and trails. The existing plan, the Parks, Recreation and Active Transportation Plan (PROST), was adopted December 17, 2007. The purpose of the 2021-2022 planning process was to create a new, overarching document that assesses and makes recommendations to provide for sufficient parkland, recreation/aquatics programs, active transportation options and facilities for Bozeman citizens. The plan will also guide the expansion of these essential services as the community grows and changes. The recommendations in the plan are based on an updated review of community needs and priorities and may result in the revision of local development code requirements, procedures and criteria. The plan also makes recommendations regarding the role of the parks, recreation, and active transportation systems in fulfilling the goals of recently adopted and applicable City of Bozeman plans and guiding documents such as the Bozeman Community Plan, Climate Action Plan, the County Triangle Trails Plan, and other professional, industry metrics. Lastly, the plan has recommendations and supporting appendices that will improve the efficacy of the Parks and Recreation Department's tasks including master park plan review, individual park site plan review and recreational programming, cost- recovery and marketing. A Request for Proposals (RFP) for professional services for the Parks, Recreation and Active Transportation Plan (PRAT Plan) was advertised in March of 2021 and the City entered into a Professional Services Agreement with Agency Landscape and Planning on July 13, 2021. Consultant responsibilities described in the PSA include the following: 555 background research and analysis of relevant state and local laws, policies and plans; participation in the creation and implementation of a public outreach and engagement plan; needs assessment and community goal, objective and priority development; assessment of the level of service of existing parks, recreation and active transportation systems and services; implementation/policy recommendations for improving both the City's recreational program offerings and the land use/urban design components of the park system, including natural areas and the active transportation network. The First Amendment to the Professional Services Agreement was authorized by the City Commission on September 20, 2022 to include city- wide wayfinding for active transportation within the scope of the project. With the creation of the Urban Parks and Forestry Board (UPFB) by the City Commission via Resolution 5328, the Recreation and Parks Advisory Board (RPAB) was disbanded and UPFB assumed the responsibility to focus on the Parks, Recreation and Active Transportation Plan from drafting through adoption. The UPFB will forward their recommendation of the PRAT Plan to the City Commission for final adoption. With the adoption of the PRAT, the City Commission will also be asked to formally adopt the Gallatin County Triangle Trails Plan. The remaining schedule for review of the PRAT Plan includes the following public meetings (subject to change with revisions to be posted on the PRAT Plan website (engage.bozemen.net/pratplan): February 14 - City Commission Presentation and Work Session February 22 - Transportation Board Work Session (Active Transportation) February 23 - Urban Parks and Forestry Board Work Session Early March - Release of Final Plan Draft March 23 - Urban Parks and Forestry Board - Final Recommendation April 11, 2023 - City Commission - Review and possible Adoption Please use the link above to the Engage website for PRAT chapters and appendices under review. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:N/A ALTERNATIVES:N/A FISCAL EFFECTS:N/A 556 Attachments: PRAT-Plan.pdf Report compiled on: January 19, 2023 557 2023 COMPREHENSIVE PARKS, RECREATION, AND ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN Report DRAFT November 2022 City of bozeman 558 Acknowledgments Organization Name Name Name Organization Name Name Name Organization Name Name Name Organization Name Name Name Agency Landscape + Planning | Berry Dunn | Sanderson Stewart | Alta Planning | Groundprint | ETC Institute will be updated 559 Contents introduction Relationships to Other Planning Efforts/Projects plan process state of the system Bozeman Prat Vision goal 1 goal 2 goal 3 goal 4 goal 5 How do we get there? xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx 560 A unique natural setting a fast-growing micropolitan city history of the park system From prost to prat relationships to past plans previous prost plan transportation planning (TMP) alignment with udc processin this chapter1. introduction 561 5 Nested in the Rocky Mountains of Montana, Bozeman, a city of nearly 50,000 people as of the 2020 Census, is one of the fastest growing micropolitan areas in the country. The city includes a vibrant historic downtown, is home to Montana State University, and serves as a gateway to the wonders of Yellowstone National Park and other natural areas. In addition, the city boasts its own recreational elements, programs, facilities, open spaces and trails, all of which contribute to the vision embodied by the City’s slogan: “The Most Livable Place”. In fact, its high quality of life, vibrant cultural elements, access to nature, and recreational opportunities attract new residents at a rate that is putting Bozeman on the trajectory of becoming Montana’s third largest city by 2025. A unique natural setting Bozeman is situated within the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem, which is the largest intact ecosystem in the continental United States. It is at the foothills of many environmentally sensitive areas, with the Bridger Mountains to the northeast and Gallatin National Forest to the south. A 90 mile drive southeast of the city center takes one to Yellowstone National Park. Established in 1872 Bozeman is one of the fastest growing cities of its size in the nation. as the country’s first national park, Yellowstone attracts an average of 4 million visitors annually, many of which use Bozeman as their home base to access the park. The park serves as an important sanctuary for the largest concentration of wildlife in the lower 48 states, which includes elk, bison, grizzly bears, and nearly 300 bird species. Directly south of city limits is the 1.8-million acre Gallatin National Forest which is home to four federally listed threatened species: the grizzly bear, gray wolf, bald eagle, and the Canada Lynx. Bozeman’s location near these ecological sanctuaries cements its identity as a city co-existing with nature. Bozeman is at a unique hydrological setting: the city is situated at the headwaters of the drainage of the Missouri River Basin. This means that all precipitation flows away from the city. Numerous rivers, streams and irrigation canals transverse Bozeman, mostly in a north- south direction. Primary rivers in the Bozeman area include the Gallatin, Madison, Missouri, Yellowstone and Jefferson. These rivers, creeks and streams host different habitats, scenic views, and a diverse population. Due to their excellent recreational value, these water bodies have greatly influenced the location of parks, open spaces, and trails. A fast-growing micropolitan city Bozeman is one of the fastest growing cities of its size in the nation: the population has grown by 43% in the past decade. Cities that are experiencing similar trends or challenges as Bozeman, known as “peer cities” include Fort Collins, Missoula, and Helena. In contrast, these cities have grown by 20% or less in the past decade, with the exception of Bend, OR which has grown by 29%. Bozeman and the greater Bozeman area are projected to keep growing at an annual rate of about 3% to reach more than 200,000 people by 2040. According to the 2019 City of Bozeman Community Housing Needs Assessment, as of 2017 27% of owner households were single- occupant, compared to 37% of renters households. A majority (41%) of owned households were 2-persons. There is also a high percentage of roomate occupancy, contribution to a large percentage of over 3-persons households (33% 562 6 for owners and 29% for renters). Bozeman’s population is young compared to the rest of the state, with the city’s median age at 27.4 years old, compared to 40.1 years old statewide. Given its younger population, and the presence of Montana State University, most of the population is single with 64% of residents filing as such, almost twice as much as the state’s average. The city is not as diverse as its peer cities, with 92.1% of the population identifying as white. During and following the Covid-19 pandemic, many people relocated to Bozeman from urban areas across the country in search of more space, access to recreation and proximity to nature, making Bozeman an ideal place. While growth is bringing opportunities for investment, its rapid pace puts pressure on the natural system and recreation areas. The timing of this update highlights the need for a proactive planning approach to maintain Bozeman’s high access and use of park spaces and recreation services. History of the park system In May of 1883, the same year Bozeman became an official town, the City added a street grid of 52 blocks south and west of city limits. Investors set aside two blocks as a public park. The park was named Cooper Park, after one of the investors, and was a popular spot for picnics in the summer. Other early parks include Southside Park, Lindley Park and Bogert Park, which were added to the park system in the 1920’s. The land of what is now Bogert Park (originally Bogert Grove Park) was originally purchased by the City as a tourist park following its past use as a favorite overnight camping location during community events like the Bozeman Roundup. Following the purchase, the park quickly became a popular spot for locals to picnic and host Boy Scout gatherings. Recreation programs began the same decade when Eva Pack became the City’s first playground supervisor at Beall Park in 1929. She worked at the park during the summer months and served as Athletic Director for Montana State College during the Figure 1.1 Rec Mobile Program 563 7 Figure 1.3 Cooper Park, the City’s first public park. Figure 1.4 Bogert Park is an early addition to the City’s park system but still serves as a hub today hosting community events. Figure 1.2 Bird’s eye view of the city of Bozeman, Gallatin County with approximate boundary of its historic core. school year. Early recreational programs at Beall park included playgrounds, tennis, picnic grounds, a bandstand for music in the summer and an ice skating rink in the winter. In the 1950’s, the City planned for a park and recreation department with a professional recreation director and a park maintenance crew. The 1958 City Plan listed a variety of seasonal activities, including swimming, baseball, and special activities during summer months, and ice skating, sledding, and dancing in the winter. In the 1960’s, community service groups and the City Recreation Board began promoting the idea of a new indoor-outdoor swimming pool. Support for the idea was plentiful but costs escalated, inhibiting the proposal until a bond passed in 1974. The Bozeman Swim Center opened to the public in 1975. The center closed temporarily in May 2022 to make necessary repairs to the building’s structure. These repairs are expected to wrap up at the end of 2022. As of 2022, the city’s system includes over 1,000 acres of parkland and 79 miles of natural trails. Residents have the option to participate in a vast variety of seasonal recreational programming, including art classes, nature-based activities, athletic offerings, ice skating, sledding, volleyball, and various indoor classes. 564 8 From PROST to PRAT Bozeman, like many other peer cities, is grappling with fast population growth, a changing climate with warmer winters and drier summers, and a higher risk of environmental disasters. The City aims to assess and plan to address these issues while recognizing the importance of racial equity, inclusion and environmental sustainability within its parks, trails, and recreation centers and programs. This document is part of its mission to continue its high standard for quality of life through a safe, welcoming and connected parks and trails system. The City’s most current plan is the 2007 Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails (“PROST”) Plan which has guided the creation of numerous trails and has helped elevate the role of parks, recreation programs, and facilities in maintaining the City’s quality of life. However, as Bozeman’s population continues to grow and diversify, the City’s parks and recreational facilities will face more pressure from increased usage. The City and its residents want to ensure that it maintains the quality elements, natural resources, and recreational opportunities that continue to draw people in. Bozeman’s parks, open spaces, and trails are important in realizing this vision. This plan also brings an active transportation emphasis into the world of parks, recreation, and open space, including the full network of trails from Trails Roads Railroad City Boundary Growth Boundary Streams Lakes & Reservoirs Parks Open Space Future Parks Planning Area Figure 1.5 Bozeman trails are an asset to connect the community 565 9Figure 1.6 The planning area and its context Streams Lakes & Reservoirs Parks Open Space Future Parks Downtown Bozeman MSU Growth Boundary 0 0.5 1 mile N Planning Area 566 10 gravel paths to on-street bike facilities. This shift recognizes the community’s shifting values around transportation and recreation, and the need to create greater connectivity between park assets and places across the city. In 2012, voters approved a $15 million Trails, Open Space and Parks (TOP) bond program which has so far increased parkland by 145 acres and added 3 miles of trails. Additionally, in 2020, at the outset of the COVID pandemic, residents voted overwhelmingly in favor of the Parks and Trails District to address park and trails maintenance in the City. This document first aims to understand and inventory the existing system of parks, recreation and active transportation. This assessment informs a set of recommendations to enhance current elements for all Bozeman citizens, as well as guide the future expansion and evolution of the system to meet the needs of a growing and changing community. Relationships to Other Planning Efforts/Projects Previous PROST Plan Adopted December 17, 2007, the City of Bozeman’s current Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails (“PROST”) Plan provides a framework for integrating existing facilities and programs, Figure 1.7 Main Street and Downtown Bozeman What is the Parks and Trails District? In 2020, residents voted to create a parks and trails district. This district provides a dedicated source of funding for maintaining and improving our City’s parks and trails. One of the key components of the District is authorization for the City to annually levy assessments to provide for maintenance of all City- owned or managed parks and trails. This means that every penny that goes into the Parks & Trails District will be spent on parks and trails in the Bozeman community. It also ensures that the these publicly accessible spaces are maintained consistently acorss the CIty. 567 11 while further developing a system of parks, recreation facilities and programs, open spaces, and trails. The plan also helped to establish City policies and influenced the evaluation of development proposals that impact this system. Finally, it provided a basis for grant application, regulatory requirements, and other funding mechanisms for parkland expansion. Following an assessment of Bozeman’s recreational facilities and trends at the time, the plan identified issues and needs for the City of Bozeman’s Recreation Division as (1) increasing the quality and/or quantity of local swimming facilities, (2) enhancing local recreation facilities for youth, (3) developing two new family-oriented leisure aquatic centers, one southwest and one northwest of town, (4) developing a community recreation facility with an indoor-outdoor aquatic component connected to a large community park, (5) offering programs that provide multi- generational recreational activities, fosters healthy family relationships, develops character and team building programs, educates. Through community surveys, the PROST plan identified trails as the most used recreational facility in the City. The PROST plan was successful in ensuring new private development and city growth contributed to new open space and trail creation. 2007 2017 PROST Plan Population 2022 ~50,000 people Population 2010 37,280 Transportation Master Plan PRAT Plan! Figure 1.8 Current documents that are informing PRAT Plan. The PROST plan was used by the city starting in 2005 but formally adopted with the 2008 version of the transporation plan. 568 12 Transportation Master Plan (TMP) Upgrades to the City’s transportation system following the PROST Plan and the community’s increasing interest in transportation-related matters called for a comprehensive transportation master plan to help direct future growth through innovative planning. The Bozeman Transportation Master Plan (TMP) aimed to provide a new examination of multi-modal transportation issues within the Bozeman area and address the present and future needs of the community. Since the release of the document, the City’s paved pathway network has been expanding. However, although the PROST plan also highlighted the importance of a connected trail system, the two documents are not always in sync. The objectives of the PROST plan sometimes differ from the TMP, complicating the implementation of both the TMP and PROST, further exacerbated by the fact that the two documents are funded and managed by two separate departments. Alignment with UDC Process The Unified Development Code or UDC is a set of regulations that support public health, safety the PROST plan identified trails as the most used recreational facility in the City. Since the release of the TMP, the City’s paved pathway network and on-street bike lanes have been expanding. and general welfare related to physical city growth, use of property and development. Found within Chapter 38 of the Bozeman Municipal Code, the UDC covers a wide range of subdivision and zoning topics such as setbacks, building height, allowed uses, landscaping, affordable housing and parking. Some regulations apply city-wide while others are specific to different city districts. In terms of parks, the UDC (in compliance with state law) sets the calculations for minimum park area (and/or cash in lieu) requirements for new residential development as well as minimal design requirements such as frontage, irrigation and sidewalks. The UDC also addresses other related factors such as trails and pathways and watercourse setbacks. Rules related to park and facility usage are addressed in a separate chapter (Chapter 26) of the Bozeman Municipal Code. The City is at the beginning stages of a UDC overhaul. This process will include targeted implementation of adopted plans and is expected to be completed by the end of 2023. The timing of this plan is ideal for recommendations related to parks, recreation and active transportation to be incorporated into the new code. 569 13 Figure 1.9 Bike tour through City parks to kick off the PRAT process Figure 1.10 Many residents commute to work by bike everyday and share the road with cars. 570 14 timeline and milestones engagement approach and outcomes methods and milestones engagement key findings in this chapter2. plan process 571 15 Timeline and milestones The development of the PRAT Plan was a 15-month process, beginning in the Summer of 2021 and concluding in the Winter of 2022. The planning process was framed largely around significant engagement efforts to ensure the desires of the community and Department staff were accurately reflected in the plan’s recommendations. Plan development was also shepherded by the Urban Parks and Forestry Board (UPFB). The plan process was structured around four phases: Phase 1: Analysis: The first phase encompassed the discovery and understanding of Bozeman’s unique recreation and parks system, its organization, and its provision of programs. It included a high level review of park types and distribution of parks and trails across the city, in depth study of historical and ecological systems, a needs assessment, and a statistically valid community survey. Phase 2: Vision & Concepts: During this portion of the project’s development, system-wide concepts and plan themes were developed and tested through public and staff review and comment. Phase 3: Draft Plan: The third phase of the process included establishing guiding goals and objectives, as well as an implementation strategy. A review of trail connectivity, investments and maintenance was also conducted. Phas 4: Final PRAT Plan: The final stage of the project included documentation, review, and approvals. This phase resulted in this document and supporting design and maintenance manuals. Figure 2.1 Plan process and schedule. 1 Understand Analysis + Assessment Engagement Milestone #3 August 23-25 Park Pop-ups 2 3 Begin! Project Startup Engagement Milestone #1 4 Deliver Documentation Vision Craft a Framework JULY AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT Engagement Milestone #2: April 5 and 6 Virtual Public Workshops Project Schedule 2021 2022 572 16 Engagement approach and outcomes During the 15-month long planning process, the project team engaged over 900 community members and stakeholders. The City’s parks, facilities, and programs are all beloved, and the master plan process was structured to ensure that all park users and communities were invited and had the chance to weigh in on the future of this important recreational and open space system. Methods and Milestones Much of the plan’s development occurred during uncertainty in the COVID pandemic and encouraged the City to think creatively about meeting residents where they were and through diverse means of communication and engagement. To ensure people felt safe and included in their participation, the plan included both online and in-person engagement methods, like online workshops, pop-up events in parks and events, partnerships with other city initiatives and outreach methods, and both statistically valid and community surveys with opportunities for residents to give feedback on preliminary plan recommendations. 573 17 In-person Engagement Drop-in at local events: Tabling at existing events like farmers markets and City-sponsored festivals can help to reach residents unaware of the plan process and ask quick questions about needs and aspirations for the future of the park, trail and recreation system. Early on, the City identified a series of events to participate in and destinations to visit to help build awareness of the plan process and goals and to gather feedback using questions relevant to what was being explored by the process at that time. For events happening in 2021, this meant asking about favorite parks and barriers to access using a map and mad libs exercise, in which residents responded to an incomplete sentence with responses about their recreation experiences. In the Spring of 2022, engagement at existing events focused on resident visions and big ideas for future projects or policies. Ultimately, the PRAT plan was represented at over 20 events throughout the city. Online Engagement Project Web Content: Regular content updates were made to the City’s website, which serves as an increasingly popular resource for information and updates regarding city-led projects. Alongside the City’s project page on the City’s website, the PRAT Plan was the first comprehensive plan to take advantage of a new digital platform, Engage. Bozeman.net, a Bang the Table platform. The project team shared regular project updates to the PRAT plan and served as a space for online conversations between city staff and residents. This platform was also used to share content online at milestone moments and in between. The site pulled 159 unique visits over the year that the platform was publicly accessible. Social Media: Ahead of major public milestones, the City posted visual graphics and imagery to promote the plan, promote public events, and gather reactions to early ideas on existing City social media platforms. Certain advertisements were translated into Spanish and were also posted on the City’s website, which offers Google Translate services. Statistically Valid Survey: A statistically valid paper survey was mailed to 2,500 residents across the City of Bozeman. This tool provided an important 574 18 data set that represented a user group with similar demographic characteristics to the City as a whole and offered a balanced resident perspective across the City. Final results were based on 300 total surveys providing a 95% confidence level. The City also made this community survey available online to residents who had not participated in the statistically valid survey. An additional 100 people shared their existing patterns and needs for the City system. Community Workshops: Due to ongoing COVID restrictions during the plan’s development, the project team made the decision to hold community workshops online, halfway through the plan process. These workshops included a short presentation and small group conversations that used the Engage Bozeman platform to help facilitate conversations and map or catalog participant ideas. The community workshops were recorded and posted on Engage Bozeman for anyone interested in participating but unable to attend during the early April meetings. At the end of each engagement milestone, engagement feedback was synthesized and shared with them in an easily digestible and clear format that can be shared on multiple digital platforms, both internally and with the broader community. Alignment with Other City Initiatives Safe Routes to Parks: The project team also worked in Figure 2.2 HRDC Safe Routes to Parks Community liaisons 575 19 parallel with the Safe Routes to Parks grant team to ensure the PRAT plan helps to reduce barriers to accessing parks and facilities. This grant was awarded to the Human Resource Development council, District IX (HRDC) in partnership with the Western Transportation Institute (WTI) at Montana State University and the City of Bozeman to create and test a community liaison program to highlight systematically excluded voices. The plan worked alongside three community liaisons who are connected to different underrepresented communities including the BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, and People of Color), LatinX and disability communities. The liaisons tested a variety of tools such as targeted surveys, hosting small group conversations, organizing a walk audit, and collecting stories through one-on-one interviews. Staff and Stakeholder Engagement Staff engagement was essential to the success and implementation of the plan. In October, as part of the project’s kick-off, staff and stakeholders participated in a series of topical focus groups to learn about the system through the eyes of staff, partners, and city leaders. These representatives were reengaged as part of the plan vision process in June 2022 and again to help identify implementation priorities in August 2022. Engagement Key Findings Through the engagement process, the plan uncovered that the City’s parks and trails provide an important oasis in the fastest growing city in Montana. Bozeman residents clearly value opportunities to connect with nature and to safely access walking and biking trails. Residents also want their parks and facilities to be inclusive places where they feel welcomed by other park users, staff, and by the design of these places and the programs within them. Residents were also aligned in their desires for special use facilities, more specifically swimming pools. Though these values are not explicitly contradictory, they span many topics, so the planning process was oriented toward finding the right balance of investments, whether they be in policy, Department capacity, or capital improvements. The top responses from the public engagement process were related to desires for inclusion, relevant programs and elements, safe access, nature immersion, trail Engagement by numbers (Participation and Methods) 401 community surveys (300 statistically valid) 24 disability community Surveys 12 BIPOC surveys 401 78 78 locations mapped 45 ideas shared 1 online implementation poll 4,537 unique site visits 2 online community meetings 15 meetings with city, boards, and councils 24 pop-ups at events and in parks 2 576 20 connectivity, special use facilities, and park etiquette. These seven engagement themes provide an important framework for the goals and strategies outlined within this plan. Inclusion Many residents reported feeling uncomfortable or unsafe in their parks. Efforts to enhance physical access, lead program inclusion, and expand park policies will ensure that parks, programs, and trails are welcoming for all Bozeman residents. Relevant Programs and Elements Residents continually noted their love of their park spaces and requested that same level of investment in their programs and events. Safe Access Fast moving and wide roadways that are difficult to cross, limited universal accessibility between homes and open spaces or buildings, inadequate access to parks and facilities for the disabled community, and difficult to reach park spaces were all identified as creating barriers to safely getting to barriers to people’s use of parks and their participation in recreational opportunities. Nature Immersion Residents enjoy the proximity to nature both within the City and outside its limits. Many residents are also excited for more nature play and educational opportunities. Trail Connectivity Trails not only facilitate connections between natural areas and public lands, but foster community connections as well. Residents and visitors love the existing trail network and are excited for a more connected system of pathways and trails that are connected to beloved parks and important community destinations. Special Use Facilities Swimming pools and aquatics programs were consistently among the top ranked needs by plan participants. The need for more water play and swimming opportunities emerged early on in the process, before the temporary closure of the Bozeman Swim Center. Other desired special use facilities included a nature center and affordable indoor fitness spaces. Care Many different audiences use Bozeman parks, and not everyone is thoughtful about the impacts their park use has on the experience of others, the park’s Figure 2.3 Themes Inclusion Relevant Programs and Elements Engagement feedback themes 577 21 maintenance burden and financial cost, and the natural resources and habitat quality. In order for parks and trails to be fully inclusive, the City must ensure that people’s use of parks isn’t entirely shaped by dogs, that park rules are clearly communicated and respected, that habitat isn’t unnecessarily destroyed and that park equipment and facilities aren’t vandalized. Through a community of care, people can protect their investment made via the Parks and Trails District and can begin to yield to others’ needs. Safe Access Nature Immersion Trail Connectivity Special Use Facilities Care 578 bozeman outdoors Existing Facilities and Programs Equitable Access to Parks Comparison to Similar Cities bozeman at play Recreation Assessment Distribution of Programs and Activities Similar Providers community survey Evaluating Facility and Amenity Needs Against Demand bozeman ON THE MOVE Existing Active Transportation Systemin this chapter3. state of the system 579 23 Bozeman’s park system reflects its unique development history, natural system infrastructure, and outdoor culture. The recreational facilities, parks, and trails are intertwined into the daily lives and experiences of Bozeman residents and have become a central part of one of the most cherished destination towns in the country. To understand more deeply how this system is structured and how to expand its role equitably across the community, we need to understand what the system includes today and compare that understanding against what we’ve heard from residents. We also need to see how Bozeman’s system compares to other cities to identify where there is an abundance of access and where gaps exist. Finally, we have to look to the future, to anticipate needs not yet identified and proactively address those trends through the plan. To do this, the PRAT plan evaluated the complexity of the system through three lenses: ◊Bozeman Outdoors - What is the structure of the physical system and how does it compare to cities with similar populations and growth patterns? Figure 3.1 REcreation programs invite residents of all ages to spend time outside. ◊Bozeman at Play - What programs and events does the city lead and what programs are led by other similar organizations? ◊Bozeman on the Move - What are the connections and gaps in the city’s system of trails, paths, and street network and how can the City work to close gaps in access between parks, homes and other important destinations? 580 24 Bozeman Outdoors There are 91 city parks and 24 linear open spaces in the City that range in size and function. Within city parks, there is a total of 895 acres of different kinds of park elements like sports field and courts, fishing docks, playgrounds, open space, and meandering stream corridors. Since the PROST plan, the system 895 city-ownedacres of parks 390 open spaceacres 17 acres of parkspace per 1,000 residents 176 miles ofoff-street routes 125+ programs City 895 acres Park Ownership (Acres) Private 41 acres County 108 acres has preserved 17 acres of park space per 1,000 residents. The Citys’s park system plays host to a variety of fixed and temporary park elements . From ballfields to wintertime skating rinks, tennis courts to dogs parks, and paved trails to BMX trails, Bozeman’s parks are destinations for everyone. 581 25 Equitable Access to Parks Understanding park needs and equitable distribution of services is multi-layered and includes demographic mapping of ◊population density, ◊car ownership, ◊race, ◊income ◊disability ◊age (particularly among seniors and children under 18). This snapshot of Bozeman’s current population provides a basis for understanding community needs for recreation elements. Demographic ranges have been combined into a composite geography that reveal places with defined opportunities for city services like parks and recreation programming. In general, areas surrounding MSU and west of 11th Avenue and northeast of Oak Street and 19th Avenue show the highest need for parks and elements based on the demographic composite. The demographic data also establishes the magnitude and composition of population change in Bozeman and highlights segments (youth, the elderly, and people with incomes below the poverty line) that the City should position itself to better serve in the future. A proximity analysis reveals physical community access and gaps to parks and facilities. The analysis evaluates a ten minute walk (half mile) and six minute bike ride (one mile) from each park by following the existing road structure and it also takes into account road crossing barriers from the 2017 Bozeman Transportation Master Plan. Any walkshed that falls over those significant barriers was removed Figure 3.2 Social vulnerability demographic compilation map. Households with the highest vulnerability are the darkest shades on the map. Social Vulnerability Map High Vulnerability Low Vulnerability City Boundary 582 26 Figure 3.3 Proximity analysis of access to parks from a 10 minute walk. Roads Railroad City Boundary Growth Boundary Streams Lakes & Reservoirs Parks Areas within 10-minute walk N Parks Proximity Map Many of the Spanish-speaking people living in the Wagon Wheel Trailer Court identified Main/ Huffine as a major barrier to get to their nearest neighborhood parks - Kirk Park and Bozeman Pond. 0 0.5 1 mile 583 27 to further indicate where park access is limited, especially for residents with mobility limitations, families, and people without cars. Access to parks is generally strong within the denser areas closest to Bozeman’s Downtown. Still, the mapping within this section only highlights the geographic and quantifiable side of the PRAT’s understanding of access. From conversations with various members of the disability community, the Safe Routes program liaisons surfaced that a significant number of parks and trails and elements lack access for the disability community and for low income and Latinx communities. . The City has gotten ahead of growth by investing in new parks where growth was highest, so neighborhoods with the highest populations have high walkable access to parks. This means that park access is typically high along gridded city streets. Conversely, large areas west, north and south where large subdivisions are being built lack walkable access to community parks and elements or are bisected by fast moving streets like Huffine Lane (Highway 191) and 19th Avenue. Bozeman is growing most rapidly in the areas with the newest parks as a result of land dedication regulations for new developments. Communities north and west of downtown are also increasing in population, and this growth pattern is projected to continue and reinforces the importance of safe access between parks and neighborhoods. Population growth is also occurring outside of downtown near the edges of the city. Comparison to Similar Cities As a city of just over 50,000 people, Bozeman has an abundance of park acreage, but the city’s population and development continues to grow up and out, a phenomenon that has outpaced many other urban areas during the pandemic. Prior to 2020, Bozeman was already growing rapidly, similar to peer communities. Like Bend, Oregon, Fort Collins, Colorado, and Boulder, Colorado which boast substantial outdoor tourism economies - Bozeman appeals to an outdoor culture and is increasingly a destination for people seeking outdoor adventure. The PRAT plan looks to cities of similar size and character to understand how Bozeman’s acreage, average park size, trail miles, and park and facilities elements compare. This assessment incorporated data from both the Trust for Public Land (TPL) and the National Recreation and Parks Association (NRPA) to draw these comparisons. Bozeman was compared to seven other similar cities - Fort Collins, Colorado; Missoula, Montana; Helena, Montana; Corvallis, Oregon; Billings, Montana; Boulder, Colorado; and Bend, Oregon. Not only are these cities generally similar in size, ranging from 28,000 to 170,000 residents, they also have been growing substantially over the last decade. While Bozeman is the second least populous city among this comparison, it is the fastest growing city among those compared. Bozeman also has the third highest number of acres per thousand residents (17 acres), after Bend, Oregon and Missoula, Montana. Where is Bozeman Leading? Through its development code and 2012 TOP Bond, Bozeman has facilitated investment in playgrounds and its trail system, and is working to expand access to a variety of typical park elements across the city. A closer look at Bozeman’s facility and amenity counts against similar cities highlights the importance of those investments - Bozeman has 54 playgrounds, twelve more playgrounds than Bend, Oregon with the second highest number of playgrounds. Bozeman is also well served by pavilions and natural surface trails. Bozeman however also has a deficit of recreation 584 28 Figure 3.4 With a population growth of 43% in the past decade (2010-2020) Bozeman has grown faster than peer cities that share similar growth patterns, size, and community appeal. Corvallis, OR Bend, ORBillings, MT Boulder, CO Fort Collins, CO Population Growth 2010-2020 Bozeman, MT Helena, MT Missoula, MT Peer Department Total Population (2020)Growth 2010-2020 SOURCE: NRPA/US CENSUS 99,178 59,922 +12%117,116 108,100 53,293 169,810 28,190 73,489 +29% +11% +10% +43% +18% +14% +10% Density Residents/mi2 2,697 2,347 4,003 2,839 4,240 3,015 1,724 2,671Missoula, MT Billings, MT Bozeman, MT Fort Collins, Boulder, CO Corvallis, OR Bend, OR Helena, MT 585 29 facilities (the City currently has no recreation-focused facility), basketball and tennis courts, sports fields, and water based play (spraygrounds and pools). Bozeman at Play From learning and exploring nature to opportunities for dancing and family cookouts, to spaces for sledding in the winter and public art, Bozeman’s park, recreation and active transportation system has the potential to meet the needs and wishes of every visitor. These places provide vital venues for people to experience togetherness or provide space for reflection and alone time, to get exercise, and to learn new skills. The PRAT Plan evaluated what programs exist today and gathered community thoughts and ideas about what experiences they enjoy, would like to see expanded, or would like to introduce. Recreation Assessment As Bozeman grows and changes, changes and new trends in recreation are also evolving and expanding across the country. Understanding both the localized and national changes in demand for recreation and wellness- centered classes and programs can help project future program needs and the spaces that will CITY OF BOULDEROPEN SPACE ANDMOUNTAIN PARKS County Line Boulder Open Space andMountain Parks System Open Space andMountain Parks Trail Head LEGEND In Boulder, CO, the Open Space and Mountain Parks Department manages permanently protected land that forms a buffer around the city. In contrast, while Bozeman has great natural areas within town, if better connected, they can serve as an urban oasis and part of an active transportation system. support them. The community survey helps to define demand for programs and research into the City’s seasonal program guides and participation data as well as staff insights help to provide a framework for the city’s availability and gaps in program access. Mix of Recreation Programs The city provides over 125 different types of classes and events to residents. Many of these programs fall into the category of “core program”, which are categories that help to distinguish what audiences or what topics are covered in the City’s offerings Bozeman has seven core programs - active aging, adult, aquatics, camps, events, preschool, and school’s out activities. In many departments, core programs are organized by activity type (fitness, nature, sports) and not by age group (preschool, youth, adult). Bozeman uses a combination of both activity type and age group. Like many growing cities, the Bozeman Parks and Recreation Department acknowledged a desire to expand offerings that are more inclusive and welcoming to an increasingly diverse population. As the variety of programming increases, re- establishing the core programs by topic or activity will help to clarify what programs are offered publicly, and better identify gaps How does Bozeman Compare to Peer Cities? 586 30 in program areas internally. The City’s core program areas are described in more detail below. Active Aging Active aging programs are for participants 55 years and older. Nearly all of the classes offered in 2019 were fitness classes including Heart and Sole, Balance & Beyond, Sole Energy, and Stability and Mobility. Adult Adult recreation encompasses most programs that serve participants ages 18 years and older. These include avalanche awareness classes and sport leagues such as sand volleyball, ping pong, badminton and pickleball. Aquatics The Department offers a robust swim instruction program for children 6 months through 12 years. For the youngest age group (6 months – 3 years), these classes are parent and child together (Angelfish). For the next age group (3 & 4 years), Clownfish is offered. There are several levels of swim instruction for 5 to 12 years olds and also for 6 to 12 years olds depending on ability. These courses are offered at the Bozeman Swim Center year-round and at the Bogert Pool during the summer months. The Department also offers lifeguard courses and a Water Safety Instructor course. Camps The Department provides several camp options for the community broken down into different age groups including 3 – 5 years, 5 – 7 years, 5 – 10 years, 8 – 10 years, and 11 – 14 years. Camps are offered during spring break, winter break, and summer and include opportunities for all interests including art, fishing, sports, and spring break at The Mill just to name a few. Events Several events are offered throughout the year – many which are free and do not require advance registration. These events include Easter Egg Hunt, Gallatin Valley Earth Day Festival, Discovery Walks, Pickin’ in the Park, Fishing Derby, National Trails Day, Youth Triathlon, Sweet Pea Children’s Run, Wellness in the parks, Walk with Ease, Avalanche Awareness, and Active Aging Week. Monster Mash (a Halloween themed event), Breakfast with Santa, and the Father Daughter Dance all require advance registration and target specific age groups. Preschool Programming for preschoolers is divided up into several different age groups and includes a range of activities, from organized sports to nature play and education for ages two years to four years old.BEND, ORBOULDER, COCORVALLIS, ORFORT COLLINS, COMISSOULA, MTBOZEMAN, MTAQUATIC CENTERS 1 3 1 0 1.621 MEDIAN In the past year, Boulder, CO has updated and added skate elements to 3 existing City Parks and at their Main Library Boulder, CO also has the most aquatic centers out of all of our peers How does Bozeman Compare to Peer Cities? 587 31 School’s Out Activities School Day off events are offered throughout the school year when school is not in session. Programs are offered for 5 to 10 years and include several opportunities including sports, nature, and science. Youth Youth programming is also divided up into several age groups that range from six years old to early teen programs. Other Services In addition to the core programs and activities, the City manages other types of facilities that provide community leisure opportunities. ◊Bogert Pool is an outdoor facility that has two swimming areas: a 25- yard lap pool (3.5 – 9 feet in depth) and a shallow pool for young children (1 – 3 feet in depth). The lap pool includes a climbing wall, a small slide, and a zip line. The shallow pool includes a small slide. This facility is typically open from mid- June to late-August each summer. ◊The Swim Center is an indoor aquatic facility with a 50-meter, eight lane lap pool that is typically open year- round. From mid-August to mid-March, it is divided into a 25-yard pool and a 24-meter pool. ◊The Rec Mobile provides recreation to children ages 2 – 10 years in neighborhood parks throughout the spring and summer. Recreation leaders facilitate play that keeps children outside, active, and engaged with peers. These opportunities are available on Monday and Wednesday evenings at different parks. ◊Several Bozeman facilities are available for rental including Beall Park Recreation Center, Lindley Center, Story Mansion, and Story Mill Community Center. Distribution of Programs and Activities A total of 329 programs were offered by the Department between 2018 and 2019. Understanding how the City’s enrollment-based program offerings are distributed across core program areas helps to identify broader City trends and community needs. The program with the largest quantity of programs offered was aquatics (160), regardless FIELDS Bozeman sits below the median for number of fields: elements typically found in Community Parks 28.9 27.8 16 9.28.6 28.5 19.8 BEND, ORBOULDER, COCORVALLIS, ORFORT COLLINS, COMISSOULA, MTBOZEMAN, MTMEDIAN How does Bozeman Compare to Peer Cities? PER 50K PEOPLE 588 32 of season. The second largest quantity of programs offered was preschool (43). Excluding events since they generally don’t require registration, the program areas with the lowest quantities are school’s out activities and adult programs, with 8 offerings each. Events (4) include the Easter Egg Hunt, Pickin’ in the Park, Youth Triathlon Camps, Youth Triathlon Race, Sweet Pea Children’s Run, Wellness in the Parks, Walk with East, Avalanche Awareness, and Active Aging Week. Evaluating Programs by Age The PRAT plan also evaluated City programs against the current citywide age breakdown. This analysis surfaced that a high percentage of programs, 49%, were designated for early childhood. Of all the age-specific programming, 91% are designed for youth under the age of 18 years, while youth only represent 22% of the community’s population. A small percentage of programs were offered for adults, ages 18 to 54, who make up 66% of the population. A large percentage (91%) of the Department’s enrollment-based programs are designed for youth, while youth only represents 22% of the community’s population. Adults, ages 20 years and up, make up 78% of the population, while only 9% of programs are designed for adults. For the City’s programming to cater mostly to youth is consistent with most park and recreation agencies’ program offerings across the country. Youth programming not only benefits those enrolled, but caretakers as well. Yet the percentage of youth programming among most agencies usually only represents half to two-thirds of all offerings. The City’s program menu’s age segmentation does not need to mirror the community’s age demographic segmentation in an exact manner; however, an ongoing goal can be to balance the menu toward a reflection of the community makeup. Program Enrollment Total enrollment into the Department’s programs was 3,414 in 2019. Aquatics had the highest enrollment with 1,092 participants, followed by preschool at 783, and camps at 661. Figure 5 shows all the programs and the percentage of each of the whole. There are some programs that are offered by other organizations who take their own registration (Skyhawks) and this data is not included in any of these analyses. Aquatics accounted for a third (32%) of the 2018-2019 enrollments, and preschool and camps accounted for approximately one- fifth of the programming each, 21% and 19% respectively. Bozeman sits below the median for number of courts: elements typically found in Neighborhood Parks BEND, ORBOULDER, COCORVALLIS, ORFORT COLLINS, COMISSOULA, MTBOZEMAN, MTMEDIAN COURTS 8.3 13.9 12 9.5 37.3 22.5 17.2 How does Bozeman Compare to Peer Cities? PER 50K PEOPLE 589 33 Aquatics accounted for nearly half (48.8%) of the program menu and 32% of all enrollments, which is typical due to the smaller class size and the advertisement of several course sections that can be combined, if needed. For camps and preschool, the percentage of participants is greater than the percentage of courses offered. Similar Providers Bozeman residents enjoy a wide variety of recreation programs offered by a host of different organizations – some of these are nonprofit groups and others are private businesses. Many of these are provided space for their activities by the Department. The Department permits space to several affiliate groups that provide recreation programs to the community. When discussing the permitting process with staff regarding the local sports programs, understanding of requirements were inconsistent. Future policies should be clarified for consistent communications between the Department and affiliate groups and should consider requiring all affiliate groups to: ◊require all coaches to submit to a criminal background check, ◊compare the list of coaches to the state and federal sex offender databases, ◊charge a special field use fee for nonresident participants ◊track demographics and city-county resident status, scholarships given out and DEI training Fitness programs are often a desire for young adults in communities across the country. Due to the low percentage of programs offered by the Department for adults, fitness opportunities within the community were reviewed. There are several private facilities spread out in the community offering fitness opportunities for Bozeman residents. In addition to the camps offered by the Department, there are dozens and dozens of summer camps available for Bozeman Youth. There are opportunities for children of all interests including art, dance (ballet, hip hop, aerial hammock, and choreography), hiking, camping, rock climbing, STEAM (outdoor science, coding, sports, yoga, drumming, karate, performing arts, horseback riding, farm camp, and more). Community Survey During the winter of 2021, the City released a community survey and received 300 responses. This survey, which is statistically valid and has a confidence level of 95%, How does Bozeman Compare to Peer Cities? PLAYGROUNDS 20.6 14.8 54 12.2 24 23.3 19.3 23 MEDIAN Bozeman sits well above the median for number of playgrounds, which are typically found in both Neighborhood and Pocket Parks BEND, ORBOULDER, COCORVALLIS, ORFORT COLLINS, COHELENA, MT*MISSOULA, MTBOZEMAN, MTPER 50K PEOPLE *FOR 30K PEOPLE590 34 highlighted community-wide desires for programs, parks, and park improvements. The survey, which was administered by mail, contained a cover letter, survey document, and instructions for the survey to be taken online. The cover letter included instructions for taking the survey over phone for any residents that preferred to speak a different language in their response. Findings The survey surfaced significant shifts in park and facility use that could be attributed to the impacts of the pandemic on outdoor and indoor recreation, like recent changes in level of comfort with visiting facilities or taking part in online programs. There were also many unsurprising conclusions, including the finding that Bozeman residents visited parks much more frequently in the past year than the national average. Ninety-seven percent of Bozeman residents visited parks in their community during the past year compared to 70% nationally. Using a calculation that combines the importance that residents place on a park, trail and program with the identification of unmet need, the survey was able to identify where a community should invest resources to add or increase facilities or programs. The top five priorities for investment in recreation facilities and elements in Bozeman included natural trails, on-street bike lanes, indoor pools, outdoor pools, and shared use paths. The top five priorities for program investment in Bozeman include aquatics programming, arts and culture, winter recreation, fitness, and etiquette programs for park and trail users, tied with outdoor adventure activities. The community survey also surfaced barriers to park or facility use and program participation. Only 22% of residents participate in programs and events offered by the City, which is below the national average of 32%, however this doesn’t necessarily reflect the people who participate in programs within parks managed by user groups. The top reasons for lack of participation are that residents are not aware of the programs offered, have no time to participate, or have little interest in what the City offers. While park participation is at an all time high for residents in Bozeman, barriers still exist. Limited time, lack of relevant elements, maintenance and cleanliness concerns, and limited operating hours were among the top barriers to park visitation. When considering the priorities identified between facilities and programming together, there top 5 priorities for investment recreation facilitiesprogramsnatural trails on-street bike lanes indoor pools outdoor pools shared use paths aquatics arts + culture winter recreation fitness etiquette 591 35 Bozeman on the Move The 2007 Bozeman PROST Plan established that the local trails are the City’s most utilized recreation facilities. Likewise, the PRAT Plan statistically valid survey revealed this to still be the case in 2022. This is not unique to Bozeman, as throughout the country walking and biking on local trails are low-cost, low- impact recreation and exercise options for people of all ages and abilities. Existing Network As a result of past and current investments in shared use paths, natural-surface trails, and on- street bike facilities, the City of Bozeman has established a solid foundation on which to continue to build a robust, city-wide pedestrian and bike transportation network. Currently, Bozeman is home to over 39 miles of shared use pathways, 79 miles of natural- surface trails, and 58 miles of on- street bike facilities, resulting in an exifsting active transportation network of approximately 176 miles of off-street routes. Active transportation routes were consistently prioritized as highly valued community elements during public outreach for this plan. Current trails and pathways is clearly a need to focus future investment on aquatics as well as outdoor education. With indoor and outdoor pools and aquatics being included in the top four for both facilities and programs, finding spaces for arts and culture and history programming are two additional areas of potential focus. In addition, having a nature center and outdoor education both rating high, this type of programming (and potentially creating a new space) should be a priority as well. Bozeman already provides winter recreation, but additional offerings should be explored. Evaluating Facility and Recreation Component Needs Against Demand The community survey and public engagement process helps to define priorities for strengthened or new elements from a public needs perspective, while an evaluation of national and similar peers articulates an understanding of demand for elements. By evaluating need and demand in unison, the PRAT plan can best describe where priorities for investment exist. Based on this evaluation, there are clear, aligned priorities for aquatics facilities, a nature center and indoor fitness space. In 2020 American Trails published a guide highlighting the health benefits of trails: Mental Health Benefits •Spending even 20 minutes outside will have short term effects on the brain to reduce stress. •Countless studies show people self-reporting reduced stress, clearer thought patterns, more optimism, and an overall heightened sense of well- being after being outdoors. •We are now seeing more medical practitioners prescribe time in the outdoors as a way to combat depression, anxiety, and other health related issues. Physical Health Benefits •For every dollar spent on trails, there is a three- dollar savings in health care costs. •More overall physical activity is measured in communities after trails are built. •Cardiovascular benefits are seen across all trail user types. This means healthier hearts, and a reduction in preventable disease for trail users. •Commuting by foot or bike gains popularity when trails go into a community. This both reduces traffic and creates a healthier, more physically active community. Trails Health Benefits 592 36 what is active transportation? From the Partnership for Active Transportation: “Active transportation is a means of getting around that is powered by human energy, primarily walking and bicycling. Often called “non-motorized transportation,” we prefer the term “active transportation” since it is a more positive statement that expresses the key connection between healthy, active living and our transportation choices. Communities that prioritize active transportation tend to be healthier [because they enable] residents to be more physically active in their daily routines and [because they have] cleaner air to breathe. Active transportation systems also foster economic health by creating dynamic, connected communities with a high quality of life that catalyzes small business development, increases property values, sparks tourism, and encourages corporate investment that attracts a talented, highly educated workforce.” Source: Partnership for Active Transportation Existing Bike Routes Existing Key Connector Proposed Key Connector Roads Railroad Streams Lakes & Reservoirs Parks Open Space City Boundary Forest and Woodland Grassland Shrubland + Savannah overwhelmingly received positive responses from the community in terms of quality, and are also rated the top two most important facilities for future needs. Pathways and trails for recreation and transportation are top community priorities identified in numerous local planning documents including the Bozeman Community Plan and the Bozeman Area Transportation Plan. The current network, however, needs substantial improvement regarding equitable accessibility, range, connectivity, and safety. These key elements were identified through the survey, public engagement and City staff input. East-West Corridors The trail system relies on the natural network of waterways throughout the valley that allow development of trails to parallel these waterways. As a result, traveling in a north-south direction using off street trails is relatively accessible throughout the City. However, corridors that run east-west are outcompeted by sidewalks and on-street bike lanes as the only options for this directional movement. Lack of Connectivity The City has a system of shared use pathways, on-street bike facilities and off-street trails, but connectivity between these 593 37 0 0.25 0.5 1 mile Current Active Transportation Network N Downtown Bozeman 594 38 facilities is often lacking. For many common routes continuity of experience is frequently broken through lack of transitions between existing trails, shared use paths and bike lanes. This makes these routes more challenging and less comfortable as users are forced to negotiate wide roadways with high speed traffic. Furthermore, recreational trails in the winter, while still used by residents, can be unsafe or not enjoyable due to a lack of maintenance. System Barriers Based on analysis within the Transportation Master Plan of critical safe crossings at high traffic intersections and arterial streets which act as barriers, there are opportunities for future investments in parks and trails to be coordinated with opportunities to make the sidewalks, crossings, and roadways that surround parks and trails safer. Where are needs and demands aligned? Demand represents priorities identified by the Bozeman community in the statistically valid survey and Need represents alignment of elements with peer communities. For example, not many people indicated that sports fields were a priority in Bozeman, though the City has a lot less sport supporting infrastructure than peer communities. Playgrounds were identified as being important and Bozeman has more than their peers. There is alignment in both demand and need for the following: •Aquatics •Nature center •Indoor fitness 595 39 Barriers: Parks, trails, or facilities No time to visit parks/trails/facilities Parks/trails/facilities do not have elements I want Parks/trails/facilities not well maintained Operating hours are not convenient Not aware of parks/trails/facilities 18% 12% 9% 7% 5% Top barrier to access Figure 3.5 Top five identified barriers to parks, trails, or faciilties within the Statistically Valid Survey Barriers: Programs Not aware of programs offered No time to participate in programming Types of programming not interesting/relevant/desired Times when programs offered not convenient Program location/venue not convenient Top barrier to participation 45% 24% 16% 12% 6% Figure 3.6 Top five barriers to programs within the statistically valid survey Splash pads Courts Trails Fields AquaticsDog accommodations Playgrounds Community gardens/ Food Forest Indoor fitness Nature center HIGH NEED HIGH DEMAND HIGH NEED LOW DEMAND LOW NEED HIGH DEMAND LOW NEED LOW DEMANDDEMAND NEED Figure 3.7 Demand (the y-axis) represents priorities identified by the Bozeman community in the statistically valid survey and Need (the x-axis) represents alignment of elements with peer communities. 596 safe routes to parks community engagement The “Safe Routes to Parks Community Survey: Disability Community” and interviews conducted by the Community Liaisons indicated that several respondents were unsatisfied or unsure of support options for programming and events. A lack of access to ASL interpreters in the City of Bozeman was used as one example. Other participants cited inadequate transportation options to programming and events as a barrier. Comments included: “Post that interpreters will be made available upon request.” “He needs an interpreter to be understood. And it is the law.”- Interviewee “If there is a sign with info, you can offer a bar code to scan so the device will link to web pages or audio files to be able to read it.Also, partnering with organizations like Montana Independent Living Project, Montana Association for the Blind, School for the deaf/blind, VR agencies and senior focused housing to get more folks active and out into the community.” - Survey Respondent “At the event at Bogert, he would have liked to be able to ask questions. He couldn’t do that without an interpreter.” -Interviewee 597 “We haven’t had much opportunity yet, but how do the deaf get interpreters so they can get equal access?” - Survey Respondent “For self and native students, main concern is how do we do this for free” - Interviewee during Safe & Welcoming Parks to BIPOC Communities conversation “At MSU, one thing that has been successful having events that engage in a direct cultural activity; not a lot of visual cues that people of color belong unless there are other people there” - Interviewee during Safe & Welcoming Parks to BIPOC Communities conversation community Liaisons Mikayla Pitts Hosted group conversations and conducted surveys to engage BIPOC community conducted interviews and surveys to engage disability community Hosted front door conversations to hear from Latino community Bri Daniels Luis Islas 598 42 Pocket Parks 2 acres Neighborhood Park 238 acres Community Park 145 acres Regional Park 54 acres Special Use Park 200 acres Natural Areas 179 acres Linear Parks/ Buffers 64 acres Acreage of Park Type Parks and Trail Facilities by Type There are eight park types that frame how the City activates, maintains and develops parks. These park types have unique characteristics that balance a variety of elements and demands based on their size, use, and location within the city. Each type is described in more detail on the next few pages. In addition to these seven park types, the PRAT also includes active transportation types. For more information on active transportation elements and types, head to Bozeman on the Move. 599 43Park TypeNumber of ParksTotal AcreageProgram and UseEnvironmental BenefitsSiting/AccessPocket Park 6 2 Provides public space and recreational opportunities to underserved or commercialized areas Allows access to shade + water during hot summers Urban or commercialized areas without access to public open space, accessible by sidewalks, trails, or residential streets Neighborhood Park 47 238 Flexible multi-use spaces (traditional recreation elements, including courts, playgrounds, and fields, informal seasonal recreation, movable furniture, access to electrical/water) More land area for denser canopy + shade, accessibility by interconnected trails create valuable ecological corridors for local wildlife Centrally located within residential service area, easily accessible by way of interconnecting trails, sidewalks, or residential streets, aesthetic qualities, leftover parcels of land that are undesirable for development are also generally undesirable for neighborhood parks and should be avoided. Community Park 7 145 Provides active and passive recreational facilities for all, space for group activities, sitting areas Guided walking trails connect to existing trail network, areas with native plantings, and nature study areas Natural character of site, serviced by arterial and collector streets, community trail system, accessible to parking areas Special Use Park 8 200 Provide for single-purpose recreational uses (such as indoor/outdoor recreational facilities or historic/ cultural sites) Single-use cultural sites advocate for environmental stewardship (arboretums, native plant gardens, sculpture gardens), benefits of turf with droughts, keeping facilities cool Accessibility from arterial/collector streets, recreation need, community interests, and land availability determine location Natural Areas 27 179 Provide for greenway, trails, and nature viewing opportunities Protect natural resource areas such as wetlands, riparian areas, and ponds Lands unsuitable for development, remnant landscapes, parcels with steep slopes and natural vegetation, drainageways, riparian areas, wetlands, ponds Natural Areas in Parks ---- Provide for greenway, trails, and nature viewing opportunities Protect natural resource areas such as wetlands, riparian areas, and ponds Lands unsuitable for development, remnant landscapes, parcels with steep slopes and natural vegetation, drainageways, riparian areas, wetlands, ponds Linear Parks 22 64 Allow uninterrupted and safe pedestrian and bicycle movement between parks, connect parks, trails, recreational areas, and open spaces into a cohesive sytem Linear parks and buffers improve stormwater runoff, connect ecological habitat Edges of developments, buffers adjacent to linear features such as water courses or railways, linear parks are often places with significant topography, located in floodplains or other locations not suitable for development Regional Park 1 54 Provide park elements and larger recreational facilities for the larger region, special events, concerts, sports tournaments Connect to countywide trail sysem Sited to be accessible from a multi-county area, serviced by arterial and collector streets and the countywide trail system, accessible to parking areas 600 4. bozeman prat vision The Bozeman Parks, Recreation and Active Transportation Plan’s recommendations are formed around five central goals: Unify and provide safe, equitable access to all. Invest in alignment with changing community needs and trends. Connect and experience all that Bozeman has to offer. Adapt to changing environmental pressures. Increase staff and resources to benefit the community. 1 2 3 4 5 601 45 goal 1: unify goal 2: invest goal 3: connect goal 4 :adapt goal 5: increase in this chapterThese citywide goals were developed through analysis into the existing system today, identification of gaps and opportunities for the future, and - most importantly - through community conversations, engagement, and input into the plan. Each goal is supported by a series of recommendations that will help to realize and implement them over time. Community conversations and ideas were distilled into plan themes which drove the outcomes. The PRAT recommendations reflect the community’s love for their parks and recreation system, their aspirations and concerns for its future, and the changing social, environmental, and economic context that surrounds the system and future generations who will steward it. 602 46 UNIFY and provide safe, equitable access to all. A high priority of the PRAT Plan and the Bozeman Parks and Recreation Department is to provide high quality, equitable access to parks, nature, and recreation programs for all city residents - especially as the city grows and changes in the coming years. Through the planning process, both the level of service analysis and feedback from community members pointed to key areas of gaps in access, barriers created by fast-moving roadways, and to the increasing challenges of having more park users occupying the same beloved spaces. Even as population growth is projected to increase significantly in the coming years, the Bozeman Parks and Recreation Department holds firm in its commitments to work to ensure residents are within a safe ½ mile (or ten minute walk) to a publicly-accessible park, and can access a wide variety of recreation experiences and programs that meet the expectations of Bozeman’s high quality of life. To meet this goal, the plan includes strategies to ◊ensure a baseline of elements across the city, ◊meet targets for expansion as growth occurs, ◊balance park use by increased numbers of people ◊reinforce the diversity of the park system and ◊expand access and usability of the system in all seasons and into the evening. Goal 1 603 47 Bozeman’s growth as a city has moved from its original development in the 1920s around Downtown and the first park at Cooper Park outward, with recent development focused in the west, north, and southwest. As the decades have evolved, development patterns have changed and the shape, uses, and character of the parks and open spaces within each neighborhood reflects the era within which it developed. This varied character is both a strength and a challenge for the system: the variety lends interest and choice across the city, yet makes equitable access to recreation elements difficult when the underlying park fabric is so different. Looking forward to increased growth and change, the PRAT plan seeks to leverage the diversity of the system, while ensuring a baseline of elements, access, and equity citywide. In the rectilinear gridded neighborhoods of historic central Bozeman, vehicular transportation did not fully impact the neighborhood pattern leading to more walkable neighborhoods where classic neighborhood and community parks predominate today. There, over ½ of all parks are community serving parks and over ⅓ are neighborhood parks. In the next ring of development, which formed in the middle to later 20th century, Bozeman grew outward from its downtown core and was developed around the rise of the automobile. Here, parks - such as the recent Story Mill Park - perform more multifaceted services drawing community members from both local neighborhoods and driving distances. In this middle era of development, natural areas in parks, linear parks and special use parks are much more common. Finally, modern neighborhoods that developed most recently in Bozeman echo the car- orientation of the latter part of the 20th century. There, destination parks with unique elements, such as Gallatin County Regional Park, can be found alongside more natural areas. 604 48 1.1: Create a baseline of elements across neighborhoods ◊Add park assets that were identified as in high demand by the community in new and existing spaces. Using community feedback as a guide, add elements to increase access citywide to playgrounds (including universal playspaces), trails, spaces for dogs, community gardens/ food forests, fields, courts, and splash pads. Explore ways to respond to high demand and identified need for aquatics, indoor fitness, and nature centers, which require more significant investment. ◊Create and implement a plan to provide universal access to parks and programs. Parks and recreation services should be made accessible to all Bozeman users regardless of age, ability, or language. The Department can begin with an ADA audit of physical facilities and program access to create an ADA Transition Plan which should include clear phasing over time and identified funding. Universal access should consider access and cultural appropriateness with special consideration of play spaces, trails (including paved trails), printed and digital materials, wayfinding and signage, and ongoing community engagement and communication. ◊Strategically include and allocate resources for community engagement in parks, recreation plans and capital projects to align with changing community needs and concerns. UNIFY Strategies Parks and recreation services should be made accessible to all Bozeman users regardless of age, ability, or language. “N19th is a bike/ped barrier. Need safer crossing for east- west shared use paths” - Feedback from April Public Workshop 605 49 Bozeman’s recent Strategic Plan resulted in creation and adoption of the Engage Bozeman Community Engagement Initiative in April 2021 which is a guiding framework for how the community can contribute to decision making processes. The PRAT plan incorporated Engaged Bozeman principles and approaches, and was able to use a partnership with the HRDC’s Safe Routes to Parks grant to increase the focus on engagement and outreach to underheard communities to ensure that their voices were heard and incorporated. In particular, the grant included community liaisons to Bozeman’s BIPOC, Latinx, and disability communities. Future engagement should build on the lessons learned from PRAT engagement overall and on the early relationships from this engagement to deepen and extend connections into all communities in Bozeman. Perhaps the most important lesson learned was that additional resources (both funding and time) need to be specifically added to projects to meaningfully support this type of more diverse engagement. Additional engagement recommendations include: ◊In line with the universal access strategy above, future community engagement should factor in universal access and translation/interpretation. These components should be planned and budgeted for at the start of any project. ◊During future park and recreation planning and improvements, staff should develop engagement processes that match the scale of the improvement and subsequent impact. These plans should coordinate with the City of Bozeman’s community engagement process and early outreach to community organizations, partners, and affected community members. “Parks build and enhance neighborhood character and community culture” - Partners PRAT Visioning Session “Need parks and outdoors where people can just “exist and be yourself;” as a writer I crave to walk to a park and just write or read” -SRTP Conversation: BIPOC Communities 606 50 UNIFY Strategies 1.2: Maintain or expand parkland as the community grows The City of Bozeman currently provides 17 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents, not including undeveloped open space, putting Bozeman’s current parks provision in the upper middle of similar peer cities. If the population grows to 91,000 residents by 2050 and the city does not acquire land, this ratio will drop to 9.6 acres per 1000 residents. While Bozeman’s overall park supply does not indicate a shortfall today, staying in balance with future rapid growth will be important since residents have made clear that parks are a core driver of quality of life in the city. ◊Refine and clarify the process of obtaining new parks, facilities and trails from new development through changes to the UDC. The UDC currently requires new residential development to support park system growth through either direct land dedication, a contribution to a fee-in-lieu fund, or a combination of both. This contribution acknowledges that residential development generates a need for additional parkland, facilities and trails; yet, it has not always produced spaces with the right match of elements to community needs or enabled more strategic investment in the system. The plan recommends creating criteria that allow more targeted allocation of resources to meet the specific needs of a neighborhood and acknowledge the land’s intrinsic value for recreation or environmental contributions. These criteria, if met, could enable the contribution of more well-designed park spaces and more connected trails/pathways between parks. Department staff have identified the core programs as active aging, adult, aquatics, camps, events, preschool, and school’s out activities. In many departments, core programs are organized by activity type (fitness, nature, sports) and not by age group If the population grows to 91K by 2050 and the City doesn’t continue to acquire parkland through development, park acreage will drop to 9.6 acres per 1000 residents. The City of Bozeman currently provides 17 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents 607 51 (preschool, youth, adult). Bozeman uses a combination of both. As the variety of programming increases, re-establishing the core programs will help to clarify what programs are offered publicly, and better identify gaps in program areas internally. ◊Continue to improve coordination with the School District. State law and the UDC allow for a subdivider to dedicate a land donation to a school to satisfy park land requirements, subject to the approval of the City Commission and acceptance by the school district. This provision could be explored in more detail to foster increased coordination for mutually beneficial public facilities such as a new aquatics center. Figure 4.1 UDC process Intent Applicability Base 0.03ac/du Calculations Land Dedication Fees in Lieu Combinations Possible New Park Base Requirements Types of Parks Key Design Criteria Types of Pathways Base Requirements Key Design Criteria Pathway Connection $ Toward Improvements Criteria Cash-in-Lieu Critera UDC 38.420 608 52 ◊Explore the possibility of requiring commercial development to also contribute to parkland. Hotel and motel guests are increasingly using city parks and trails as Bozeman continues to grow into one of the leading outdoor recreation tourist destinations and sports tournament centers. While state law currently prohibits requiring parkland for subdivisions that are all nonresidential, there is the potential to explore commercial linkage for parkland through zoning requirements. Using existing national data to supplement local data can help to efficiently create the needed nexus study. This could supplement the cash-in-lieu fund and be used for park and pathway improvements. Staff should monitor discussions at the state level that could open the door for parkland requirements applicable to commercial developments. ◊Invest in acquisition of new pathways, parks and open spaces that: 1) help to close existing 10-minute walk gaps, and 2) overcome extreme physical barriers. For future investments, the Department should use park space & trail gap mapping to prioritize adding land in areas that are experiencing limited public park space today, or reducing barriers, such as rail or busy roads, between existing neighborhoods and parks. ◊Focus increased parks and recreation service in areas of high growth or current park overcrowding. Work with the Community Development Department, during growth policy updates in particular, to align park and recreation investments in areas planned for new housing or increases in density in the future. UNIFY Strategies tourists are increasingly using city parks and trails as Bozeman continues to grow into one of the leading outdoor recreation destinations 609 53 Figure 3.8 Proximity analysis of access to parks from a 10 minute walk. Roads Railroad City Boundary Growth Boundary Streams Lakes & Reservoirs Parks Areas within 10-minute walk TMP-identified roadway barriers Park access gaps N00.5 1 mile 610 54 ◊Acquire land to make key trail, path or park connections identified in the Active Transportation component of the plan (Goal 3) and to better connect people to parks. ◊Collaborate with staff in Transportation and Engineering to expand the continuity of the active transportation network by overcoming existing gaps through acquisition of land, facilitation of safe crossings and the maintenance of continuity of facility type and level of comfort. 1.3: Balance the needs of different park users The popularity of many of Bozeman’s parks, open spaces, trails, and recreation centers is both a success and a challenge. Community members reported many issues with overcrowding, user conflicts, and balance of different activities. As the City continues to grow, these concerns will only increase without efforts to respond with greater service or programs and policies that reinforce shared spaces. ◊Expand kindness campaigns. Continue to partner and expand the One Montana “Outside Kind” campaign that reinforces kindness and civic engagement in public spaces. Reinforce the Gallatin Valley Land Trust’s additional educational efforts to support similar outcomes. ◊Make rules and regulations clear and easy to understand. Ensure that all parks, trails, and centers contain clear, direct, non-conflicting, and community-minded signage that clarifies rules, regulations, and expectations of behavior for use of facilities. Chapter 26: Park Regulations, Bozeman Municipal Code be separately evaluated and updated. UNIFY Strategies Case Study One Montana “Outside Kind” campaign: The primary goal of Outside Kind is to share best practices, principles and tips for enjoying the outdoors in any community. Whether you wish to encourage your friends and family or visiting guests to hike kind, ride kind, fish kind, etc., Outside Kind is designed to offer users consistent and clear messages around outdoor activities, increase user knowledge, and maintain natural resources. We also encourage users to engage with organizations and communities that provide opportunities for you to enjoy our wild places. 611 55 ◊Partner with volunteers and youth. Explore a park ranger volunteer program and junior ranger program to expand monitoring capacity and model kindness in parks and recreation spaces. ◊Consider adding non-conventional dog and dog- owner oriented programs or policies. A large number of conflicts and complaints were noted between dog owners and non-dog owners. A few areas for exploration to address this topic directly include: ◊Expand programs and activities. Many parks and recreation departments offer a range of courses geared to dogs, including training, owner information, and social activities. Consider broadening into this area through partnerships or expanded programs to support more formal opportunities for dogs and dog owners to socialize and get easy access to instruction. ◊Consider designated off-leash hours. Some communities also include specific off leash hours in parks, not just designated off-leash areas. These additional off leash hours are designed to avoid times when small children or high volumes of people are likely to use the park space and reduce conflicts. Some areas are also closed to dogs during wet or thawing conditions to prevent damage to grass and field areas. Case Study The City of Austin’s B.A.R.K. program is an example of a new city-initiated dog etiquette program, based on the National Park Service’s Healthy People Healthy Parks Initiative which created a B.A.R.K. program for national sites. Austin’s B.A.R.K program strives to teach dog owners etiquette specific to visits to public parks with dogs. The program stands for: Bag your pet’s waste; Always leash your pet; Respect wildlife; and Know where you can go. With successful program completion, dogs can also become “BARK Rangers!” 612 56 UNIFY Strategies 1.4: Promote parks that reflect unique neighborhoods but also continue to advance the City’s brand within the park system ◊Use parks to tell stories that engage with arts, culture and local history and reflect local identities. Bozeman residents identified a need and desire for more arts and cultural programming, a request that was a much higher priority for Bozemanites than in other cities. In addition to considering programs, Bozeman’s parks and trails have a chance to engage with art to express community culture, the city and region’s history, industrial relics, local heroes, and unique environmental systems. Approaches to storytelling must reflect the diversity of the city and region to celebrate a range of lived experiences as the area becomes increasingly diverse. Signage and interpretive panels can communicate effectively, while murals and other forms of public art are more creative platforms for storytelling. Always plan ahead for needed maintenance practice changes and engage maintenance team members in design decisions for non- standard features and art. Key possibilities for storytelling include: ◊Weave local sports history and heroes into parks, educating the public about important Bozeman figures such as mountaineers Conrad Anker or Alex Lowe, paleontologist Jack Horner, teacher Frieda Bull, and Sacagawea, the Shoshoni woman who accompanied Lewis and Clark on their westward journey. ◊Amplify hyper-local stories at neighborhood parks, through art, interpretation or naming, in partnership with community processes and partners. The PRAT plan engagement included a naming contest for a new park. Carefully consider Figure 4.2 Bozeman Creek bridge 613 57 the common practice of naming parks and other places after people, as the meaning and relevance of these names can change over time. ◊Work with partners to incorporate art into functional park elements when possible, like the existing frog and trout drinking fountains. ◊Draw attention and educate about interesting natural history such as watersheds, creeks, and wetlands as successful programs such as the Gallatin Valley Land Trust’s Discovery Walks have done ◊Establish a network of local craftspeople and artists who can construct elements such as benches along trails and integrate their stories into the pieces. ◊Beyond permanent installations, activate spaces and tell stories through festivals and special events. ◊Explore signature play experiences Creative play experiences are increasingly popular, as evidenced at Story Mill where design of the play structures interpret the landscapes of Montana, from farms and agriculture to rocky terrain and forested wilderness. While it is not practical to have every play structure represent this level of design for maintenance and cost reasons, there is an opportunity for strategic expansion of artful play in other areas of the city as future community parks are developed. These are key opportunities for partners or philanthropic engagement. Figure 4.3 Pedestrian bridges in Bozeman 614 58 UNIFY Strategies ◊Celebrate Bozeman’s park bridges. Bozeman’s parks and trails include many unique, architectural pedestrian bridges that go beyond their utilitarian function. The city should build on this pattern and embrace opportunities to continue it in the future. Artful/ designed bridges could be mapped to create a Bridge Loop or passport for visitors to explore Bozeman’s parks and trails through a new lens. 1.5: Support all-season recreation The Bozeman community’s desire to get outdoors and be active is not limited to fair weather days. Instead the city and its parks and recreation spaces and landscapes take on new dimensions and activities during the colder months. Maintaining access to outdoor experiences in the winter can be important to balance Seasonal Affective Disorder (SAD), which is a type of depression that is brought on during the fall and winter months. Currently, partners such as the Bridger Ski Foundation program existing park spaces, groom cross-country ski trails and support facility development. ◊Support existing winter activity partners by increasing access to complementary indoor space. Indoor spaces support outdoor wintertime activity by providing storage and warming spaces which expand programmatic and concession opportunities. Indoor space also makes participation more viable and accessible for people of all ages and abilities. Bozeman’s larger historic parks, which also are located in the east side of the community with better winter snow access, are often characterized by older park buildings. These buildings abound with charm and authenticity, but are not fully operational to the public. Opening small buildings to community use offers many benefits, but also will require additional resources, in terms of staffing and operational support. Small buildings also do not offer the efficiencies of larger centers, but meet more specific, BOZEMAN’S parks, recreation spaces and landscapes take on new dimensions during the winter. 615 59 local needs. The City should explore the costs and benefits of each site and investigate ways to partner and share costs. ◊Conduct a Feasibility Study to Open the Lindley Center. The Lindley Center is currently closed to public access, but could be explored for renovations and improvements that better support year-round public use to expand recreation and programming opportunities at Lindley Park, for skiing and beyond. A feasibility study of the building should first be undertaken to understand costs associated with physical improvements (weatherizing, insulation, code-compliant updates, access and parking), program and staffing costs, operations and maintenance implications, and community benefits. With a complete picture of needs, opportunities, and constraints, the City can explore potential partnerships or grants to support capital improvements and future operations. Vendors or concession operators and space rentals can also be additional ways to outsource elements and raise small amounts of revenue. ◊Reduce barriers to participation in wintertime activities. Many wintertime activities entail specialized equipment and require warm weather clothing to be comfortable and safe. The Bridger Ski Foundation’s annual Ski Swap is an example of a community-driven effort to make wintertime recreation equipment available in a more affordable and sustainable way. If a building like Lindley were renovated and made open to the community, a possible vendor or city-led effort could include loaning or renting equipment to encourage new users in addition to the BSF program. ◊Communicate best practices for safety outdoors in the winter. Outdoor winter recreation safety practices are similar, but different, from those in warmer months. While many in Bozeman Figure 4.4 Cross skiing is a popular outdoor winter activity 616 60 UNIFY Strategies are well-prepared for outdoor activities, newcomers to winter sports may benefit from safety information and support around hydration, staying warm, and risks to mobility. Informational signage for trails prepared for winter use or other outdoor spaces and the presence of warming huts or access to water can support safe use. ◊Adapt maintenance practices for winter use. As more spaces are made available and adapted to wintertime use, align maintenance practices and resources to additional care needed to maintain paths, parking areas, and access to facilities, parks and open trails. This might include winter maintenance of shared use paths (see Goal 3 for alignment with active transportation recommendations) to allow for more ‘year-round’ commuting, as well as enhanced winter recreation use of trails, like designated/groomed fat bike trails or Nordic skiing areas. Figure 4.5 Multi-modal transportation on trails in the winter include biking, walking, and skiing. 617 61 top barrier to usage of parks, trails, or facilities was a lack of time to participate “To cater to youth and teenagers, transportation infrastructure could be expanded for teen destinations” - Partners PRAT Visioning Session 1.6 Increase evening or night time access and activities at designated facilities with appropriate lighting, facilities, and noted hours. The top barrier to usage of parks, trails, or facilities that Bozemanites identified in a statistically valid survey was a lack of available time to participate (18%). Survey results also noted that residents say operating hours are not convenient (7% or 4th place ranking). Today, Bozeman Parks and Recreation does not have a fully operational, all day recreation and community center. Instead, a combination of the new Story Mill Community Center, Beall Center, and the Bozeman Swim Center work together to provide distinct services to the community, with the recent addition of the Story Mill taking an important step forward. However, both Story Mill and Beall Centers typically close by 4:30pm unless a user group has reserved a space (though, as of 2022, Ping Pong is happening in the evenings several nights). In contrast, Bozeman park policy is to keep parks open until 11:00pm, unless specified otherwise. In peer communities, recreation and community centers are often open until 8:00pm or 9:00pm most evenings. Evening programming and drop-in hours provide important flexible options for busy Bozeman residents of all ages. In particular, it offers a “third space” for teenagers to be together and socialize, other than home and school. Extended hours are important to capture teens and younger children after school hours and support busy people whose days are occupied with work and other requirements. Extended hours bring with them expanded needs for staff resources to support programming and facility operations. The Department should evaluate demand and access across its facilities, determining where it can begin to pilot extended hours and what it will cost to support this. As planning for the westside recreation and community aquatics facility continues (see Goal 2.1), evening hours should be considered as part of that major, citywide investment. Partners who provide youth or after- school programming may be able to benefit from access to city space through use agreements where they share space during these times and the community benefits from extended access. 618 62 Demand for existing and new programs is high, and Bozeman residents are keenly interested in structured programs like classes, sports, and events and places that allow for unstructured or individual-led recreation. Investments in this range of activities, classes, sports, and events alongside places to enable residents to explore their own creative approaches to fitness and wellness will have a significant impact on residents’ lives. Finally, the Safe Routes to Parks Community Survey: Disability Survey and a review of program participation rates all identified a gap in inclusive or adaptive programs. These programs can build on what the Parks and Recreation Department already offers and be structured around the specific needs of persons with different physical, visual, or mental abilities. From a youth soccer game to a swimming class, residents’ lives are impacted everyday by their participation in what the City offers. In addition to reaching out for more inclusive program offerings, the PRAT plan also recommends filling in existing programming gaps based on regional and national trends to create a more robust and equitable range of opportunities for residents of all backgrounds and abilities. Bozeman residents are aligned in identification of their top three program needs: access to aquatics or swimming, arts and culture, INVEST in alignment with changing community needs and trends. Goal 2 619 63 and winter recreation. Beyond this consensus, residents identified needs for over 18 different programs. Given the size of existing facilities, the City’s staffing capacity, and the wide range of recreation needs, the Bozeman Park and Recreation Department today is unable to provide all programs at all locations. By re-purposing the facilities that the City has and partnering to build new spaces that support what the community wants most in places with the lowest access, the Department can make better use of available resources and tailor programming to meet the needs of all residents. The following strategies outline how the City can make use of what it has, expand inclusive programming, and craft a transformative program menu over time. 620 64 invest Strategies Bozeman has limited indoor space to support indoor programming 2.1. Invest in distributed community hubs. Bozeman has limited indoor space to support indoor programming and has less community center and recreational facilities than its peer cities. Still, the City and various partners are actively engaged in conversations to close facility gaps. For example, the City of Bozeman, Belgrade, and Greater Yellowstone Aquatics are all working to increase access to aquatics spaces and programs through investments in new swim facilities. ◊Create an intergenerational, multi-functional center on the west side of the city. The 2012 Feasibility Study, ongoing library and community center project, and ongoing aquatics discussions reinforce the need for a new recreation center and outdoor pool facility. Investments also need to be made in existing facilities, especially the Bozeman Swim Center and Bogert Pool to ensure aquatic facilities are more evenly distributed across the city. The new westside center is slated to include aquatics space and programs, flexible indoor fitness space, and a library, as well as elements like a cafe, kitchen, and lab space. Its proximity to the Bozeman High School will support community desires for an intergenerational space that also provides focused support for teenagers, mental health connections, and universal design. ◊Prioritize future facility or community hub investments in areas with limited park access and places where growth is highest. Coordinate all long-term future community hubs near land within the city designated commercial mixed-use or residential mixed-use as identified by the City’s future land use map. 621 65622 66 invest Strategies ◊Regularly update and expand the City’s inventory to support community health, wellness, and need across the city. Baseline elements for community hubs like universally accessible and gender neutral restrooms, indoor gathering spaces, outdoor pavilions, water access and aquatics related elements, and trails within parks should be increased in areas of the city with high social vulnerability or in areas projected to grow. 2.2. Connect program offerings and facility elements to community needs, especially underserved demographic groups. While people across all ages currently participate in recreation programs, anecdotally, community members indicated that currently the Department does the best job providing a range of options for youth activities. Winter recreation, arts and culture, and aquatics or swimming programs were the programs for which the highest number of residents indicated were a priority for future investment. Many of the programs identified as community priorities have specific requirements about the types of facilities that can support their function or have limitations on inclusion. The Department should focus on providing program offerings that support a welcoming, inclusive, and accessible environment for all residents. ◊Redefine core program areas to focus on program type rather than age. Rather than organize programs by age group, which is how these programs are organized today, Bozeman should consider using activity types to designate core programs, building on the core programs residents identified as priorities for future investment. The PRAT Plan proposes that the future core programs be organized into nine program areas - arts, athletics, aquatics, camps, fitness, general interest, lifelong learning, nature/outdoor education, and outdoor adventures. 623 67 Within each program area, the goal would be to provide offerings for all age groups (preschool, youth, teen, adult, seniors). There will still be age-specific core program areas like camps, which would only include preschool, youth, and teen. Organizing in this fashion will clarify the structure of recreation programming and reinforce how the City is incorporating the needs and desires of residents for structured experiences and activities. ◊Develop a policy for inclusive or adaptive recreation programming. While the Department aims to make all programs inclusive and accommodate participant special needs for accommodations on a case by case basis, the Department needs a formal policy for therapeutic or inclusive programming to communicate how these needs will be met and set expectations regarding program participation with Bozeman residents with intellectual, physical and/or sensory disabilities. In accordance with these efforts, Eagle Mount distributed disability survey to get relevant community feedback. The City needs to continue outreach to get the word out to partner organizations, leaders and individuals with disabilities and their families. ◊Formalize oversight of athletics partners and field use with public and private sports organizations. Explore an athletic commission to work with the operators of private leagues to coordinate scheduling, sign-ups, marketing, and officials. ◊Create a clear calendar and reservation system for field reservation needs. ◊Consider requiring all affiliate groups to provide proof of coach criminal background checks, and compare the list of coaches to the state and federal sex offender databases. the city presently organizes programming by age group 624 68 invest Strategies ◊Charge a special field use fee for nonresident participants. ◊Partner to expand the mix of Arts and Culture program offerings. Building on a successful partnership with the Bozeman Municipal Band, explore more opportunities for program partnerships or shared use agreements with Bozeman Art Museum, the Emerson, and other cultural organizations to support arts-based education and capacity building. ◊Expand temporary art exhibitions and permanent public art programs across city parks and facilities. Work with the Gallatin Art Crossing and other organizations focused on community enrichment and wonderment, like Random Acts of Silliness and Mountain Time Arts to foster more engagement with art and exploration throughout the city. 2.3: Enhance awareness of programs and services. In the statistically-valid community survey, over 90% of respondents rated parks and recreational opportunities in Bozeman as good or excellent. Yet, throughout the planning process, and in that same survey, citizens and stakeholders frequently indicated they were unaware of all of the parks, facilities, and programs that the Park and Recreation Department offers. Just under half of respondents were unaware of or do not take advantage of the City’s programs. Case Study BumbleWood Thicket Fairy Village 2022 Located amid the winding, wooded paths of Glen Lake Rotary Park in Bozeman, the 3rd Annual Fairy Village contained all new fairy homes and business establishments created by talented Montana artists. 625 69 ◊Develop mobile applications for users to find system information (e.g., park locations and elements, trails and paths, program information, upcoming events) or to report a problem. People increasingly prefer to access the majority of their information online, rather than through print material. In response, communities across the country are developing mobile applications, or apps, with information and locations of all of the municipality’s parks and facilities and their elements, tied to work cities are already doing to inventory and communicate all that their parks have to offer. It can be a great tool to get the word out to teens and young adults about park-specific events, share updates about new facilities or programs, and provide a seamless connection to a centralized program registration system. ◊Continue to review the most effective uses of electronic and social media for marketing and informational purposes. Almost half of Bozeman residents are unaware of the programs the City offers and the printed program guide continues to be the primary source of information about City- led programs. The City of Bozeman social media platforms including, Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram collectively have over eleven thousand followers. These platforms could be used to market programs and classes, as well as to broadly share when the Department is hiring and celebrate major events. ◊Highlight health and wellness benefits of Park and Recreation Department programs in all informational materials. Bozeman Health, Healthy Gallatin, the Billings Clinic and the City-County Health Department, among others, already tracks localized health information and shares health The following programs are offered by many agencies across the country, but are programs not currently offered by the Department. ◊Arts ◊Childcare ◊Cooking ◊Dance ◊E-Sports ◊Golf ◊Gymnastics/Tumbling ◊Homeschool ◊Horseback Riding ◊Language Arts ◊Martial arts ◊Music ◊Open Gym ◊Pets ◊Preschool ◊Seniors ◊Theatre/Acting ◊Therapeutic Recreation 626 70 benefits of increased physical activity, thoughtful eating habits, and access to the outdoors. The Department should develop a relationship with these health-focused partners to communicate the role of parks and recreation on community health online, in social media posts and program guides, and in City facilities. 2.4 Work with local and regional tourism and economic development organizations to get the word out about Department parks, facilities, and events as destinations for visitors. Over 1.94 million visitors flew into Bozeman’s airport and spent a total of $1 billion dollars in Gallatin County in 2021 alone. As the gateway to Yellowstone and Big Sky, the Park and Recreation Department has the opportunity to capitalize on the value and quality of its events and parks to attract visitors to the city, recoup costs, and support economic development. ◊Work with the City of Bozeman’s Chamber of Commerce and Downtown Bozeman Partnership to strengthen the Park and Recreation Department’s contribution to local and regional marketing efforts. At a minimum, this could include flyers in the tourism office, at the Bozeman airport, and top ten City park attractions on partner webpages to help strengthen engagement between visitor experiences of the city. ◊Cross-market Park and Recreation Department destinations with other regional attractions to encourage visitors to spend time and money in the city of Bozeman, like the Pathway to the M. invest Strategies “People freaking love the park when it gets flooded for hockey.” -- Partners PRAT Visioning 627 71 2.5. Gather program data and track program participation annually. The pandemic has shown just how beneficial parks and recreation programs are to the health and wellness of a community; yet, Parks and Recreation Departments continue to work within increasingly tight budgets and cuts as a “nonessential” community service. Data can help to safeguard against budget cuts. Data-driven decisions are needed to better make the case for the essential contributions of parks, open space and recreation services as well as to ensure that investments are shared equitably across the city and, particularly, to places where investments could have outsized impacts on the long- term sustainability and health of residents. ◊Establish metrics for measurement of departmental goals (i.e., program cancellation rate, program reach, new programs offered, and residency). One method to establish and track progress is to develop a Department-led “business plan” process that establishes priorities and defines performance metrics as a way to quantify the Department’s success towards program goals. The business plan could be developed as part of recreation staff meetings to brainstorm metrics and connect staff to achieving quantifiable goals. ◊Begin Recreation Division quarterly program evaluation process. Using fee to participation data, customer satisfaction surveys, and overall program participation as a guide, meet as a Department quarterly to share updates to program investments, participation rates, and revenues after every program season to reflect on the season and prepare for future investments. IN 2021, Over 1.94 million visitors flew into Bozeman’S airport 628 72 invest Strategies ◊ Track population changes, community health metrics, and development starts across the city, and use that data to inform decisions about locating recreation programs and events. Work with Gallatin City and Gallatin County Health Department, Bozeman Health, and Billings Clinic to help support their Community Health Needs Assessment process and identify any metrics that help to tie individual and community health outcomes to nutrition programming, physical activity, and outdoor experiences. 2.6. Grow and formalize program partnerships in areas that are not Department mission-critical. ◊ Enhance existing local public, private and nonprofit partnerships and seek out new ones to fill gaps in service delivery. The City’s Park and Recreation Department operates over 125 programs a year, which is significant for a small group and a resident population of over 50,000 people. There are also many private and not-for-profit organizations that provide either similar programs or help to close the gaps on programs the Department cannot operate. As an example, Aquatics are among the most sought after programs for residents of all ages, reaching capacity within hours of opening the registration portal. The YMCA, discovery walks lead by the Gallatin Valley Land Trust and other programs and private providers help to alleviate the pressure on Bozeman to provide aquatics programs across the City, especially more recently when an unexpected closure at the Bozeman Swim Center meant that many City-led programs needed to find space for aquatic needs. Data can help to safeguard against budget cuts 629 73 ◊ Expand partnerships beyond the Montana Parent Magazine to deploy seasonal program guides. Additional partners could include organizations that serve persons with disabilities, persons who speak a language other than English at home, seniors, teens, and young adult populations. ◊ Create partnership, teaming guidelines and policy to define goals and expectations. The City of Bozeman currently has a wide range of partnerships with various organizations for programming, advocacy, land acquisition, and park improvements. To protect and strengthen these relationships, it is vital that the Department craft formal agreements that better define common mission, outline expectations, timelines, and specify leadership roles for both the City and the partner organization. Bozeman’s operations, capital investments, and programs are made stronger by successful partnerships with like-minded organizations. The Gallatin Valley Land Trust and their trail acquisition and trail building programs are an example of a mutually beneficial partnership the City of Bozeman wants to continue to enhance and expand. Not all relationships are as successful. Communicating expectations early and clearly around topics that can easily become significant challenges if not addressed, like maintenance or operations roles, will help to support the capacity of City staff and optimize existing resources aligned with the core mission of the Department. Partnerships, even strong ones with long standing organizations like the Gallatin Valley Land Trust, benefit from short term agreements that allow both parties to revisit terms every few years to protect the relationship over a sustained period. The PRAT plan proposes that the Department engage all partners in two to five year agreements with all program, maintenance, and investment partners. “Organize frequent family, kid runs” - Community member during August Pop-Up Event 630 76 Demand for new facilities to expand the current network of pathways, trails and bike facilities is strong and the network will need to keep up with the growing community. Additionally, the need to improve connectivity and reduce barriers within the network must be addressed. This goal is focused on the facilities and policies to connect and grow the active transportation network of shared use paths, natural trails, on-street bike boulevards, and sidewalks. A safer, well-maintained, connected path and trail system provides more residents with the option to walk or bicycle as a primary means of transportation. Whether for work or accessing goods and services, the better the network the more residents will choose active transportation as a less expensive, healthier, and environmentally friendly option over driving a personal vehicle. Additionally, how people move to, from, and within parks is fundamental to building a healthy community, both in terms of providing active options for transportation, but also for providing CONNECT and experience all that Bozeman has to offer. Goal 3 631 77 equitable means for residents to access park facilities and programs. Active communities have improved health, a cleaner environment, and are more sustainable and resilient. To maintain and improve its status as an active transportation community Bozeman must prioritize the construction and maintenance of bike and pedestrian infrastructure. Expanding and improving a network of safe, accessible, and efficient paths and trails will make active transportation an even more attractive option for everyday travel by everyone. This plan includes recommended strategies and key actions to create a connected active transportation network. Together with the specifications outlined in the Design Manual and the implementation recommendations, these strategies outline the actions to build a seamless network for active transportation. 632 78 connect Strategies 3.1. Invest in a City-wide Active Transportation Network Expanding the active transportation network will provide both reliable recreation and transportation opportunities throughout the community. The proposed network maps identify locations of new shared use paths and connector paths that begin to address the community needs identified in this plan. This plan, in coordination with the county level Triangle Trails Plan, focuses on network connectivity. Additional neighborhood trails should be added through the private development process to enhance connectivity further. ◊ Use this plan as a guide for future public infrastructure planning and investment, as well as a resource in the private development process. Proposed facilities in this plan should be incorporated into the City’s GIS mapping and other resources to ensure that the public and development community has access to the proposed network. Proposed pathway alignments shown are a ‘planning level’ representation of intended routes, which provide connections between destination points and desirable pathway experiences for a variety of users. In the final implementation of the proposed network, adjustments and modifications to the alignments shown are expected. Such adjustments may be required to navigate environmental features, meet code requirements, accommodate landowner desires, and complement future development projects. These adjustments should be expected and accommodated, so long as the adjustments do not compromise the original intent of the planning level alignment. The proposed new routes represent approximately 137 new miles of shared use paths, 36 new miles of connector paths, 107 new miles of neighborhood trails, and nine miles of bike boulevards for a total of 289 miles of new pathways. “A big investment in parks and connecting trails would make the city much more vibrant and livable.” -PRAT Plan Engage Bozeman public comment 633 79 Connector Path VARIESSHARED ROAD VARIESSHARED ROAD5’LANDSCAPEAREA 5’LANDSCAPEAREA 5’SIDEWALK 5’SIDEWALK2’2’ CURB &GUTTER CURB &GUTTER BIKE BOULEVARD 4’-6’TRAIL Neighborhood Trail VARIESLANDSCAPE AREA VARIESLANDSCAPE AREA6’-8’TRAIL Connector Path 10’CLEAR BUFFER 2’VARIESLANDSCAPEAREA VARIESLANDSCAPEAREA BUFFER 2’ Shared Use Pathway 10’PAVED TRAIL VARIESTRAIL BUFFER2’2’10’DRIVE LANE 12’CLEAR BUFFERBUFFER CURB &GUTTER Bike Boulevard Streets that prioritize pedestrian and bicycle travel by using signage, pavement markings, and lane constrictions to limit vehicle traffic. Connector Path Connect other bike and pedestrian corridors and neighborhood destinations with 6 to 8-foot wide paved or natural surfaces. Neighborhood Trail Four to six foot wide local, natural surface or gravel routes that are typically used for recreation Pathways A term used to collectively refer to all types of active transportation routes. Shared Use Path Ten to twelve foot paved paths that accommodate higher speed travel directly connecting community destinations. Typologies Figure 4.6 Active Transportation facility typologies Neighborhood Trail Shared Use Pathway VARIESSHARED ROAD VARIESSHARED ROAD5’LANDSCAPEAREA 5’LANDSCAPEAREA 5’SIDEWALK 5’SIDEWALK2’2’ CURB &GUTTER CURB &GUTTER BIKE BOULEVARD 4’-6’TRAIL Neighborhood Trail VARIESLANDSCAPE AREA VARIESLANDSCAPE AREA6’-8’TRAIL Connector Path 10’CLEAR BUFFER 2’VARIESLANDSCAPEAREA VARIESLANDSCAPEAREA BUFFER 2’ Shared Use Pathway 10’PAVED TRAIL VARIESTRAIL BUFFER2’2’10’DRIVE LANE 12’CLEAR BUFFERBUFFER CURB &GUTTER VARIESSHARED ROAD VARIESSHARED ROAD5’LANDSCAPEAREA 5’LANDSCAPEAREA 5’SIDEWALK 5’SIDEWALK2’2’ CURB &GUTTER CURB &GUTTER BIKE BOULEVARD 4’-6’TRAIL Neighborhood Trail VARIESLANDSCAPE AREA VARIESLANDSCAPE AREA6’-8’TRAIL Connector Path 10’CLEAR BUFFER 2’VARIESLANDSCAPEAREA VARIESLANDSCAPEAREA BUFFER 2’ Shared Use Pathway 10’PAVED TRAIL VARIESTRAIL BUFFER2’2’10’DRIVE LANE 12’CLEAR BUFFERBUFFER CURB &GUTTER Bike Boulevard VARIESSHARED ROAD VARIESSHARED ROAD5’LANDSCAPEAREA 5’LANDSCAPEAREA 5’SIDEWALK 5’SIDEWALK2’2’ CURB &GUTTER CURB &GUTTER BIKE BOULEVARD 4’-6’TRAIL Neighborhood Trail VARIESLANDSCAPE AREA VARIESLANDSCAPE AREA 6’-8’TRAIL Connector Path 10’CLEAR BUFFER 2’VARIESLANDSCAPEAREA VARIESLANDSCAPEAREA BUFFER 2’ Shared Use Pathway 10’PAVED TRAIL VARIESTRAIL BUFFER2’2’10’DRIVE LANE 12’CLEAR BUFFERBUFFER CURB &GUTTER 634 Baxter LnBaxter Ln Valley Center LnValley Center Ln I-9 0 I-9 0 I-90I-90Oak StOak St DurstonDurston Huffine LnHuffine Ln Kagy BlvdKagy Blvd Kagy BlvdKagy Blvd Main StMain St7th Ave7th Ave19th Ave19th AveRouse AveRouse AveFowler AveFowler Ave3rd Ave3rd Ave7th Ave7th Ave19th Ave19th AveFowler LnFowler Ln3rd Ave3rd AveSourdough RdSourdough RdCottonwood RdCottonwood Rd80 Proposed AT Network 635 Kagy BlvdKagy Blvd I-90I-90 Main StMain St Durston RdDurston Rd Griffin DrGriffin Dr W Tamarack StW Tamarack St 7th Ave7th AveRouse AveRouse Ave3rd Ave3rd AveOak StOak St I-90I-90 81 Proposed Anchor Routes Proposed Shared Use Paths Proposed Connector Paths Proposed Neighborhood Trails Proposed Bike Boulevards Existing Trails Existing Shared Use Paths City Boundary Growth Boundary Roads Railroad Streams Lakes & Reservoirs Future Parks Parks 7th-Front Street Connector Pathway Facilities Figure 4.7 Proposed Active Transportation network with zoom in of 7th-Front St Connector, highlighted in orange. N1 mile00.5 636 Baxter LnBaxter Ln Valley Center LnValley Center Ln I- 9 0 I- 9 0 Oak StOak St DurstonDurston Huffine LnHuffine Ln Kagy BlvdKagy Blvd 19th Ave19th AveFowler AveFowler Ave19th Ave19th AveFowler LnFowler LnCottonwood RdCottonwood RdBaxter LnBaxter Ln I-9 0 I-9 0 I-9 0 I-9 0 Oak StOak St DurstonDurston Huffine LnHuffine Ln Kagy BlvdKagy Blvd Kagy BlvdKagy Blvd Main StMain St7th Ave7th AveBridger DrBridger Dr Tschache LnTschache Ln Annie StAnnie St 19th Ave19th AveRouse AveRouse AveFowler AveFowler Ave3rd Ave3rd Ave7th Ave7th Ave19th Ave19th AveFowler LnFowler Ln3rd Ave3rd AveSourdough RdSourdough Rd82 East/West Connector Figure 4.8 Proposed East-West Connector highlighted in orange Proposed AT Network 637 I- 9 0 I- 9 0 Kagy BlvdKagy Blvd I-90I-90 Main StMain St7th Ave7th AveRouse AveRouse Ave3rd Ave3rd Ave7th Ave7th Ave3rd Ave3rd AveSourdough RdSourdough RdBaxter LnBaxter Ln Oak StOak St Ferguson AveFerguson AveFlanders Mill RdFlanders Mill RdValley Center LnValley Center Ln Catamount StCatamount St I-9 0 I-9 0 19th Ave19th AveFowler AveFowler AveI- 9 0 I- 9 0 Fr o n t a g e R d Fr o n t a g e R d 83 Frontage Pathway Figure 4.9 Proposed Frontage Pathway highlighted in orange 638 84 Bike facility recommendations are included in the 2017 TMP. All collector and arterial roadways within Bozeman should have some form of bike facility. This plan recommends that arterial roadways have separated facilities. This plan also recommends that the City and MDT consider upgrading existing and proposed on-street bike lanes to separated facilities. ◊ Establish an inclusive network of bike boulevards that provide low-stress connectivity through Bozeman’s core. Bike Boulevards are streets with low motorized traffic volume and speeds. They are designated and designed to give pedestrians and bicycles travel priority by using signs, pavement markings, and obstacles to limit speed and number of vehicles. Bike boulevards feature enhanced crossing treatments at major streets to provide improved comfort and safety. Bike boulevards are a key component of a low- stress active transportation network providing connections throughout the core of the community. ◊ Annually update the network improvements using the prioritization recommendations included in the “How Do We Get There” chapter. The list of proposed new routes and connections exceeds the annual investment for active transportation. In order to maintain and grow the network, the City should annually review and dedicate funds to effectively construct the new routes over time and consider requirements in the development code for new developments to infill the system as they currently do for roads. Figure 4.10 Bike boulevard connect Strategies 639 85 Bike BOulevards Bike Boulevards are local streets that prioritize bicyclists, pedestrians, and rollers of all ages and abilities. The goal of a bike boulevard is to increase bike and pedestrian comfort, safety, and accessibility to provide more active transportation opportunities through urban settings. Although some vehicle traffic is still allowed on these boulevards, cars are demoted to secondary users. Creating successful bike boulevards require implementing a variety of strategies including traffic-calming mechanisms, ample signage and pavement markings, and protected crossings. Bike boulevards should include a selection of (but are not limited to) the following design elements: Signs and pavement markings – Essential elements for establishing and differentiating a bike boulevard from a local street. Signage and markings communicate priority for bikers and pedestrians, while limiting through traffic and lowering vehicle speeds. Signage guides users through the active transportation network. Sharrow Wayfinding Identification Speed management strategies – Tools constructed to reduce the speed of vehicles on the street, ideally below 20 miles per hour. This can be achieved by vertical deflection mechanisms, horizontal deflection mechanisms, or roadway narrowing. Vertical deflections are raised sections of the roadway, such as speed humps, that force vehicles to slow down in order to go up and over the obstacle in a safe and comfortable manner. Horizontal deflections are treatments to the edges or middle of the street, such as chicanes, that require drivers to slow their speed to turn and navigate around the obstacles. Finally, physically narrowing the roadway leads drivers to slow down due to the reduced space available to operate their vehicle. - Speed humps, bumps, tables, and cushions - Chicanes - Neighborhood traffic circles - Median Islands - Curb bulb outs - Pinch points Speed Hump Chicane Median Island Figure 4.11 Sharrow pavement markings Sharrow Wayfinding Identification Speed management strategies – Tools constructed to reduce the speed of vehicles on the street, ideally below 20 miles per hour. This can be achieved by vertical deflection mechanisms, horizontal deflection mechanisms, or roadway narrowing. Vertical deflections are raised sections of the roadway, such as speed humps, that force vehicles to slow down in order to go up and over the obstacle in a safe and comfortable manner. Horizontal deflections are treatments to the edges or middle of the street, such as chicanes, that require drivers to slow their speed to turn and navigate around the obstacles. Finally, physically narrowing the roadway leads drivers to slow down due to the reduced space available to operate their vehicle. - Speed humps, bumps, tables, and cushions - Chicanes - Neighborhood traffic circles - Median Islands - Curb bulb outs - Pinch points Speed Hump Chicane Median Island Figure 4.12 Wayfinding Signage Sharrow Wayfinding Identification Speed management strategies – Tools constructed to reduce the speed of vehicles on the street, ideally below 20 miles per hour. This can be achieved by vertical deflection mechanisms, horizontal deflection mechanisms, or roadway narrowing. Vertical deflections are raised sections of the roadway, such as speed humps, that force vehicles to slow down in order to go up and over the obstacle in a safe and comfortable manner. Horizontal deflections are treatments to the edges or middle of the street, such as chicanes, that require drivers to slow their speed to turn and navigate around the obstacles. Finally, physically narrowing the roadway leads drivers to slow down due to the reduced space available to operate their vehicle. - Speed humps, bumps, tables, and cushions - Chicanes - Neighborhood traffic circles - Median Islands - Curb bulb outs - Pinch points Speed Hump Chicane Median Island Figure 4.13 Identification Signage 640 86 Vehicle volume management strategies – Established to reduce vehicle through- traffic. Diversions can be either regulatory or physical. Regulatory treatments include signs that post written street restrictions, such as banning turns or entry onto a street during specific times of day or only allowing Vehicle speed management strategies – Physical improvements to the streets that reduce vehicle speeds to a maximum of 15 to 20 miles per hour. Vertical deflections, such as raised speed humps, horizontal deflections, such as chicanes, and street narrowing, all create streets designed for slow driving. Sharrow Wayfinding Identification Speed management strategies – Tools constructed to reduce the speed of vehicles on the street, ideally below 20 miles per hour. This can be achieved by vertical deflection mechanisms, horizontal deflection mechanisms, or roadway narrowing. Vertical deflections are raised sections of the roadway, such as speed humps, that force vehicles to slow down in order to go up and over the obstacle in a safe and comfortable manner. Horizontal deflections are treatments to the edges or middle of the street, such as chicanes, that require drivers to slow their speed to turn and navigate around the obstacles. Finally, physically narrowing the roadway leads drivers to slow down due to the reduced space available to operate their vehicle. - Speed humps, bumps, tables, and cushions - Chicanes - Neighborhood traffic circles - Median Islands - Curb bulb outs - Pinch points Speed Hump Chicane Median Island Figure 4.14 Chicane Bike Boulevards Bike Boulevards are local streets that prioritize bicyclists, pedestrians, and rollers of all ages and abilities. The goal of a bike boulevard is to increase bike and pedestrian comfort, safety, and accessibility to provide more active transportation opportunities through urban settings. Although some vehicle traffic is still allowed on these boulevards, cars are demoted to secondary users. Creating successful bike boulevards require implementing a variety of strategies including traffic-calming mechanisms, ample signage and pavement markings, and protected crossings. Bike boulevards should include a selection of (but are not limited to) the following design elements: Signs and pavement markings – Essential elements for establishing and differentiating a bike boulevard from a local street. Signage and markings communicate priority for bikers and pedestrians, while limiting through traffic and lowering vehicle speeds. Signage guides users through the active transportation network. Sharrow Pavement Markings Wayfinding Signage Identification Signage Vehicle speed management strategies – Physical improvements to the streets that reduce vehicle speeds to a maximum of 15 to 20 miles per hour. Vertical deflections, such as raised speed humps, horizontal deflections, such as chicanes, and street narrowing, all create streets designed for slow driving. Speed Hump Chicane Median Island Figure 4.15 Speed hump Sharrow Wayfinding Identification Speed management strategies – Tools constructed to reduce the speed of vehicles on the street, ideally below 20 miles per hour. This can be achieved by vertical deflection mechanisms, horizontal deflection mechanisms, or roadway narrowing. Vertical deflections are raised sections of the roadway, such as speed humps, that force vehicles to slow down in order to go up and over the obstacle in a safe and comfortable manner. Horizontal deflections are treatments to the edges or middle of the street, such as chicanes, that require drivers to slow their speed to turn and navigate around the obstacles. Finally, physically narrowing the roadway leads drivers to slow down due to the reduced space available to operate their vehicle. - Speed humps, bumps, tables, and cushions - Chicanes - Neighborhood traffic circles - Median Islands - Curb bulb outs - Pinch points Speed Hump Chicane Median Island Figure 4.16 Median island Neighborhood Traffic Circle Curb Bulb Outs Pinch Point Volume management strategies – Established to reduce vehicle through-traffic by discouraging drivers to use neighborhood greenways as transportation routes for cars or actually forcing drivers to take alternative route. Diversions can be either physical or regulatory. Regulatory, or “soft”, treatments include signs that post written street restrictions, such as banning turns or entry onto a street during specific times of day or only allowing residents to drive on the greenway. These are considered “soft” barriers as they can technically be disregarded by drivers with the risk of be ticketed. Physical, or “hard”, treatments are constructed barriers that prevent certain vehicle traffic from entering the neighborhood greenway. These are considered “hard” as vehicles are physically forced to reroute to a different street. - Regulatory signage - Partial physical closer - Full physical closer - Channelized Right-in, Right-Out - Diagonal or Median diverter Neighborhood Traffic Circle Curb Bulb Outs Pinch Point Volume management strategies – Established to reduce vehicle through-traffic by discouraging drivers to use neighborhood greenways as transportation routes for cars or actually forcing drivers to take alternative route. Diversions can be either physical or regulatory. Regulatory, or “soft”, treatments include signs that post written street restrictions, such as banning turns or entry onto a street during specific times of day or only allowing residents to drive on the greenway. These are considered “soft” barriers as they can technically be disregarded by drivers with the risk of be ticketed. Physical, or “hard”, treatments are constructed barriers that prevent certain vehicle traffic from entering the neighborhood greenway. These are considered “hard” as vehicles are physically forced to reroute to a different street. - Regulatory signage - Partial physical closer - Full physical closer - Channelized Right-in, Right-Out - Diagonal or Median diverter Figure 4.17 Neighborhood traffic circle Figure 4.18 Pinch point Figure 4.19 Curb bulb outs Neighborhood Traffic Circle Curb Bulb Outs Pinch Point Volume management strategies – Established to reduce vehicle through-traffic by discouraging drivers to use neighborhood greenways as transportation routes for cars or actually forcing drivers to take alternative route. Diversions can be either physical or regulatory. Regulatory, or “soft”, treatments include signs that post written street restrictions, such as banning turns or entry onto a street during specific times of day or only allowing residents to drive on the greenway. These are considered “soft” barriers as they can technically be disregarded by drivers with the risk of be ticketed. Physical, or “hard”, treatments are constructed barriers that prevent certain vehicle traffic from entering the neighborhood greenway. These are considered “hard” as vehicles are physically forced to reroute to a different street. - Regulatory signage - Partial physical closer - Full physical closer - Channelized Right-in, Right-Out - Diagonal or Median diverter connect Strategies 641 87 Crossings – Protected intersections and crossings allow for continuous and safe travel of bikes and pedestrians along the bike boulevard corridor. Adequate protection at intersections should ensure that intersecting car traffic is highly aware of crossing pedestrians and bicyclists, while establishing a comfortable crossing experience for users. Signage Partial Closer Right-In, Right-Out Median Diverter Crossings – Protected intersections and crossings allow for continuous and safe travel of bikes and pedestrians along the neighborhood greenway corridor. Adequate protection at intersections should ensure that intersecting car traffic is blatantly aware of crossing pedestrians and bikers as well as establish comfortable crossing infrastructure for users. - Crossing signage - Pedestrian signals (RRFBs, HAWKS, etc) - Median refuge islands - Curb bulb outs Median Refuge Island RRFB Figure 4.20 Median diverter Signage Partial Closer Right-In, Right-Out Median Diverter Crossings – Protected intersections and crossings allow for continuous and safe travel of bikes and pedestrians along the neighborhood greenway corridor. Adequate protection at intersections should ensure that intersecting car traffic is blatantly aware of crossing pedestrians and bikers as well as establish comfortable crossing infrastructure for users. - Crossing signage - Pedestrian signals (RRFBs, HAWKS, etc) - Median refuge islands - Curb bulb outs Median Refuge Island RRFB Figure 4.21 Median refuge island and RRFB Crossings – Protected intersections and crossings allow for continuous and safe travel of bikes and pedestrians along the bike boulevard corridor. Adequate protection at intersections should ensure that intersecting car traffic is highly aware of crossing pedestrians and bicyclists, while establishing a comfortable crossing experience for users. Median Refuge Island RRFB Curb Bulb Out HAWKS Crossing Figure 4.22 Curb bulb out Figure 4.23 Signage/ Partial closure Signage Partial Closer Right-In, Right-Out Median Diverter Crossings – Protected intersections and crossings allow for continuous and safe travel of bikes and pedestrians along the neighborhood greenway corridor. Adequate protection at intersections should ensure that intersecting car traffic is blatantly aware of crossing pedestrians and bikers as well as establish comfortable crossing infrastructure for users. - Crossing signage - Pedestrian signals (RRFBs, HAWKS, etc) - Median refuge islands - Curb bulb outs Median Refuge Island RRFB Figure 4.24 Right-in, right-out Signage Partial Closer Right-In, Right-Out Median Diverter Crossings – Protected intersections and crossings allow for continuous and safe travel of bikes and pedestrians along the neighborhood greenway corridor. Adequate protection at intersections should ensure that intersecting car traffic is blatantly aware of crossing pedestrians and bikers as well as establish comfortable crossing infrastructure for users. - Crossing signage - Pedestrian signals (RRFBs, HAWKS, etc) - Median refuge islands - Curb bulb outs Median Refuge Island RRFB Signage Partial Closer Right-In, Right-Out Median Diverter Crossings – Protected intersections and crossings allow for continuous and safe travel of bikes and pedestrians along the neighborhood greenway corridor. Adequate protection at intersections should ensure that intersecting car traffic is blatantly aware of crossing pedestrians and bikers as well as establish comfortable crossing infrastructure for users. - Crossing signage - Pedestrian signals (RRFBs, HAWKS, etc) - Median refuge islands - Curb bulb outs Median Refuge Island RRFB Figure 4.25 HAWKS crossing Crossings – Protected intersections and crossings allow for continuous and safe travel of bikes and pedestrians along the bike boulevard corridor. Adequate protection at intersections should ensure that intersecting car traffic is highly aware of crossing pedestrians and bicyclists, while establishing a comfortable crossing experience for users. Median Refuge Island RRFB Curb Bulb Out HAWKS Crossing residents to drive on the bike boulevard. Physical treatments are constructed barriers that prevent certain vehicle traffic from entering the bike boulevard. 642 88 3.2. Identify and develop a network of Anchor Routes that serve as key travel corridors. Anchor Routes are the backbone of the active transportation network. Existing pathway corridors, like the Gallagator Trail, as well as new major corridors were identified as Anchor Routes. These primary routes will serve as longer-distance, lower-stress, and comfortable thoroughfares that anchor the active transportation network. Anchor routes provide a highly visible system enhanced by the wayfinding plan. These primary routes strive to maximize connectivity between key community locations. They are chosen because they provide cohesion within the system (sufficient spacing and connection to the supporting grid) and directness in terms of distance and travel time and they will be the focus of investment for improvements to safety, comfort and enjoyment for all ages and abilities. At times, Anchor Routes will be primarily part of a street cross-section that ties together lively civic spaces. At other times, Anchor Routes will fall entirely within a park or a parklike space. ◊ Identify key needs for land acquisition, easements, and coordination opportunities with land development projects to secure Anchor Route corridors. Developing a network of anchor routes will require a long- term vision and a comprehensive strategy to aggregate the necessary land or legal access. ◊ Prioritize funding to build, connect, and maintain Anchor Routes. The City should add prioritized shared use path and connector path projects to the Capital Improvements Plan (CIP). Likewise, an annual portion of the City’s street construction budget should be allocated to build shared use paths and critical connector paths. In areas of key park connectivity benefit and where severe barriers exist, cash-in-lieu of parkland money can be used to close gaps. Routes not likely to be completed with adjacent development should be prioritized. "I would love to ride my bike from Bozeman to Belgrade and Four Corners without traveling along a high vehicle traffic route." -PRAT Plan Engage Bozeman public comment What is an “Anchor Route”? Visionary Highly visible All-ages and abilities Uninterrupted All-season Anchor Routes are Shared Use Paths, with a minimum with of 12-feet, are intended to establish unbroken routes linking neighborhoods to parks and commercial areas. They connect to neighborhood trails and connector pathways to provide a unified network. connect Strategies 643 89 ◊ Plan for robust maintenance of Anchor Routes to ensure year-round use and a high level of accessibility. A complete set of maintenance recommendations are provided in the Design Manual. 3.3. Create an interconnected network of pedestrian and bicycle facilities by closing existing network gaps. This plan identifies areas of Bozeman that lack adequate access to the network and neighborhoods where facilities are isolated due to a lack of connectivity. New shared use paths and connectors are proposed in these areas to close network gaps and increase overall connectivity. ◊ Prioritize construction of network segments to close key connectivity gaps. This plan includes a project prioritization matrix located in the “How Do We Get There” chapter, which suggests a variety of recommended criteria including mobility equity and park accessibility. High priority projects should be added to the City’s CIP or funded with an allocation from the City’s street construction budget. ◊ Ensure new private development is required to construct any adjacent active transportation facility identified in this plan. As Bozeman continues to grow, private development has and will continue to be a primary vehicle for building out the active transportation network. The UDC should be reviewed to ensure this is clearly required and best practices from other communities should be adapted for Bozeman. "Traffic Calming on Babcock is critical as promoting access to Valley West park. Bike lane on Babcock is a step, but decreasing the width of the road and more trees close to the street edge would slow traffic more naturally on this corridor and improve multimodality." -PRAT Plan Engage Bozeman public comment 644 90 mid-block crossings Mid-block crossings are often needed due to off-street active transportation routes intersecting the street network away from existing street intersections. These are ideal for connecting neighborhood trails to nearby services and the greater active transportation network. An effective mid-block crossing consists of a marked crosswalk, appropriate pavement markings, warning signage, and other treatments to slow or stop traffic such as curb extensions, median refuges, beacons, rectangular rapid flashing beacons (RRFBs), hybrid beacons, and HAWK signals. Designing crossings at mid-block locations depends on an evaluation of motor vehicle traffic volumes, sight distance, pedestrian traffic volumes, land use patterns, vehicle speed, and road type and width. Mid-block crossings should be provided where pedestrian and bicycle desire lines clearly exist such as along trails that do not conveniently connect to an existing intersection. Experience in Bozeman shows that diverting these users to nearby intersections is not effective or practical and will not dissuade many users from crossing at the most obvious location. On collector or arterial streets with center turn lanes, mid-block crossings should be paired with pedestrian refuge islands to shorten the crossing and break it into two stages. Mid-block crossings vastly simplify the number of potential conflicts and decisions that need to be made by both trail users and motorists over intersection locations. Figure 4.26 Conflict diagram showing that mid-block crossings have fewer conflicts with vehicles. Figure 4.27 The Gallagator trail at Graf Street where trail has been cut for road extension. Snow tracks after a few hours of use show that the sign routing users to a crosswalk 160 feet away is not effective. connect Strategies 645 91 3.4: Improve east-west connections that prioritize active transportation Most of Bozeman’s primary active transportation corridors run north-south, and this isn’t a coincidence. Many of the current corridors align with creeks or other waterways that flow through the city and generally run south to north. Thus, there are currently very few continuous path and trail corridors in Bozeman that run east- west resulting in serious connectivity and access issues. A priority was placed on proposing east- and west-running routes to address this network inadequacy. Figure 4.28 At locations where active transportation facilities cross a major street, a variety of treatments can improve visibility and safety for bicyclists and pedestrians 19th & Lincoln Pedestrian Crossing Mid Block Crossing on Oak St (View 1) Kagy & MSU Stadium Mid Block Crossing at Oak & Ferguson (View 2) 646 Figure 4.29 Critical intersection and midblock crossings for safe crossing investments. Roads Railroad City Boundary Growth Boundary Streams Lakes & Reservoirs Parks Existing Trails Intersection Crossings Midblock Crossings Oak StOak St Durston RdDurston Rd Baxter LnBaxter Ln Huffine LnHuffine Ln 92 ◊ Prioritize construction of east-west network facilities. ◊ Improve safety of pedestrian and bicycle crossings for east-west routes. There are numerous north-south arterial streets that act as major barriers to any east-west active transportation routes. Therefore, as the recommended east-west routes are implemented, safe crossings must be included. 3.5. Improve crossings for pedestrians and bicyclists to overcome major barriers. Addressing network barriers created by Bozeman’s arterial roadways is a priority to ensure that the active transportation system is no longer fragmented by busy streets. Strategies have been established for various safe and intuitive pedestrian and bike crossings across large roads, such as 7th Avenue, 19th Avenue, Oak Street, and Huffine Lane, which prevent continuous low-stress active transportation connectivity across the city. Critical locations for these crossings were identified by assessing pedestrian-bicycle-vehicle conflict points and desire lines along major arterials. ◊ Prioritize improvements to critical safe crossing locations. This plan identifies the locations of important crossings that need safety improvements. ◊ Implement ‘best practice’ safe crossing configurations and technology. The safest crossing design alternatives will likely not be the least expensive. The critical importance of providing the safest crossings and the long-term health and air quality benefits of increased ridership requires committing the necessary funding. Critical Intersections and Midblock Crossings connect Strategies 647 N00.5 1 mile Figure 4.29 Critical intersection and midblock crossings for safe crossing investments. Parks Existing Trails Intersection Crossings Midblock Crossings I-9 0 I-9 0 I-90I-90 I-90I-90 Oak StOak St Durston RdDurston Rd 7th Ave7th Ave3rd Ave3rd AveRouse AveRouse AveBaxter LnBaxter Ln Catamount StCatamount St Huffine LnHuffine Ln E Kagy BlvdE Kagy Blvd Main StMain St W Kagy AveW Kagy Ave19th Ave19th Ave19th Ave19th Ave93 Critical Intersections and Midblock Crossings 648 94 3.6. Implement a comprehensive wayfinding system. A comprehensive wayfinding system is a mandatory element of Bozeman’s active transportation network. Effective wayfinding signage is a cost-effective way to improve the overall use and accessibility of the system. Comprehensive wayfinding helps people traveling throughout the network and directs them to community destinations. A coordinated and well-designed signage system improves the coherency of the network and can provide a greater sense of user security and comfort, as users receive confirmation that they are on the correct route and are aware of how far they must travel to reach their destination. ◊ Enhance users’ ability to navigate Bozeman’s network and find key destinations. The wayfinding system should give clear guidance to users to ensure their experience is safe and that they understand any accessibility considerations related to that particular pathway, crossing, or facility. ◊ Provide information such as destinations, direction, distance, and travel time. Detailed and accurate wayfinding information will increase user confidence, improve travel efficiency, and ultimately increase overall network utilization. ◊ Support and promote Bozeman’s identity. Future wayfinding should reinforce the unique identity of the City in the colors, textures and fonts used in signage. To ensure that the wayfinding identity is communicated comprehensively, implementation of the system should happen Case Study High Line Canal Vision Plan Denver Region, CO 2018 Gold National Planning Achievement Award For Public Outreach The plan proposed a comprehensive signage and wayfinding system as a kit of parts to unify the Canal’s identity and visitor orientation. The guidelines provided guidance about design direction and location placement for signage and wayfinding. Consistent identity for trails and pedestrian routes easily and safely guide users to and from the Canal as well as nearby landmarks, facilities, and community services. connect Strategies 649 95 Figure 4.30 Oak street trail within phases over ten years and include parks and buildings that tie into the active transportation system. To ensure cohesiveness of the whole system, existing signage should be considered into decisions of future wayfinding identity as much as possible. ◊ Build community voice into the wayfinding strategy process and raise visitor awareness of the overall network. The wayfinding strategy should look back to community feedback to the PRAT Plan related to access and safety in order to ensure increased awareness of the final result. 3.7: Install path imporovements along active transportation routes. Certain associated improvements adjacent to pathways are essential for the success of a functional and safe active transportation network. Others are not critical for network function but enhance the Shared Use Paths Connector Paths Neighborhood Trails Required Improvements Wayfinding Lighting Benches Bike racks Bike stations Trash Receptacles Wayfinding Bike racks Benches Wayfinding Dog Waste Stations Optional Improvements Picnic tables Water fountains Dog waste stations Lighting Bike stations Water fountains Dog Waste Stations Lighting Water fountains Trash Receptacles Benches Pathway Improvements Classification 650 96 user experience, safety, and cleanliness, and are often greatly desired by the community and are particularly necessary when trying to effect mode shift toward bicycling. ◊ Commit to installing the recommended required improvements. As discussed further in Design Manual, certain supporting facilities like wayfinding and lighting are essential to a highly functioning active transportation network and therefore are mandatory. ◊ Prioritize installation of recommended optional improvements to enhance user experience. Optional mprovements not only improve resident’s experience but encourage higher utilization of the active transportation network. These include strategically located benches, bike racks, and water fountains. 3.8: Better utilize linear parks and watercourses to connect the active transportation network with parks and open spaces. Many of the existing network gaps and new routes identified in this plan could be implemented by allowing more flexible use of linear parks and watercourse setbacks. In order to do so the Unified Development Code must be revised as recommended in the Policy Considerations section, within the “How Do We Get There” chapter. ◊ Allow all active transportation typologies to be located within watercourse setbacks. Shared use paths, connector paths, and neighborhood trails should be permitted within Zone 2 of watercourse setbacks regardless of surface types in areas where infill pathways are needed or where lot constraints prevent additional setback. ◊ Allow certain active transportation corridors to be designated as linear parks that meet “I would like to see the city plan for a connecting network of trails that allow bike and ped access throughout the city, even to Belgrade and Bridger Bowl, etc.” -PRAT Plan Engage Bozeman public comment connect Strategies 651 97 parkland requirements. In many cases corridors that incorporate pathways and adjacent open space should be recognized as both active transportation routes and parkland. 3.9: Ensure inclusive and equitable access to and within parks. To develop an inclusive active transportation network, pathways must be designed and maintained to engage communities of varying incomes, and feel safe and accessible to all age groups, modes of travel, and ability levels. The network should consist of a variety what is micromobility? Micromobility is an umbrella term encompassing a variety of small, generally low-speed vehicles and conveyances that can be electric or human- powered and privately owned or part of shared fleets. Micromobility devices include most small, predominantly one-person vehicles that operate at low speeds and are not gas-powered. Most micromobility devices fit within a standard bike lane or sidewalk and weigh less than 100 pounds. Although the term applies to everything from skateboards to wheelchairs, the term, coined by Horace Dediu, gained popularity when fleets of bikes and scooters flooded city streets in the 2010s, kicking off a revolutionary trend that has altered the way planners and policymakers think about and regulate street space in many cities. When supported by safe and accessible infrastructure, micromobility devices can bridge the gap between public transit options, replace cars for short trips, and complement larger delivery vehicles by providing last-mile services in dense neighborhoods. Shared fleets can eliminate the cost of private ownership and the hassle of bringing devices onto public transit while connecting urban residents to their destinations. Source: What Is Micromobility? | Planetizen Planopedia 652 98 of facility types that promote walking, biking, and micromobility as both recreation activities and transportation options. Finally, the network of shared use and connector paths should meet the minimum standards for accessibility to create a variety of accessible active transportation and recreation opportunities for those with mobility challenges. ◊ Develop policies to allow for the use of e-bikes, e-scooters, and similar modes of assisted mobility on active transportation routes. Electric assisted modes of micromobility encourage and allow more people to engage in active transportation. Comprehensive policies that include education and enforcement components can effectively incorporate all modes and minimize user conflicts. Enforcement starts with good design. ◊ Develop a toolkit to evaluate and prioritize projects. Use adopted City plans (Strategic Plan, Community Plan, Climate Action Plan, Transportation Master Plan), key network connections, and equitable access goals as prioritization criteria. 3.10: Revise network typology classifications and comprehensive design and maintenance standards. Clearly defined typologies for active transportation routes is critical to identifying which facilities best serve which users. The recommended typologies are intended to not only provide common nomenclature for this plan and future plans, but also to establish corresponding design standards. A more comprehensive analysis of these typologies and standards is included in the Design Manual. ◊ Redefine and simplify off-street active connect Strategies 653 99 Winter maintenance, like removing snow from shared use paths, is critical to year-round active transportation Street Network Active Transportation Network Local Neighborhood Collector Connector Arterial Shared Use Urban Route Anchor Route Comparative Typologies transportation typologies. This plan recommends a revised structural hierarchy of pathway typologies that loosely mimics Bozeman’s roadway classifications of arterial, collector, and local streets. The three recommended pathway typologies are shared use paths, connector paths, and neighborhood trails. ◊ Create standards for bike boulevards. Bike boulevards create low-stress routes within existing neighborhoods by increasing awareness and safety of pedestrians and bicycles, by ensuring vehicle speeds are reduced. Major street crossings will have treatments designed to enhance safety and comfort. ◊ Establish comprehensive standards and specifications for construction and maintenance. 654 92 The intersectionality of Bozeman’s natural and human systems continues to shape how the city grows and manages its environmental, social, and economic assets. The City of Bozeman is shaped by thousands of years of human interaction with the land, which has changed more rapidly as white settlers built roads, businesses and houses over the landscape--culverting creeks and covering wetlands. As the city approaches its growth boundary, the balance of agrarian uses and woodland, meadow, and riparian land covers continues to decline at a rapid pace, giving way to more developed places. The City has responded to rapid growth with forward looking policies and investment priorities to ensure that new development is balanced with valuable open spaces both large and small. Recent investments in City-owned open space has skewed towards larger parcels dedicated to natural areas and special use facilities, alongside a greater array of neighborhood scale parks that provide safe, walkable access between new housing developments and neighborhood centers and natural areas. These City policies are ADAPT to changing environmental pressures. Goal 4 655 93 also predicting a future that could result in an overabundance of these neighborhood parks and natural areas, potentially putting watercourses, riparian corridors, and wetlands in vulnerable positions without proper stewardship or management. The PRAT Plan presents an opportunity to redefine our relationship to our natural systems and to develop approaches for City-owned and managed parks to effectively address climate change and protect our natural places for the use and enjoyment of generations to come. This goal identifies strategies to protect valuable green space balanced with increased development pressures, improve water conservation and air quality, support responsible use of our parks and natural areas, and craft a resilient future. Montane grassland 18% Sagebrush steppe 6% Floodplain and riparian 5% Deciduous dominated forest and woodland 4% Deciduous shrubland 2% Introduced vegetation 1% Wet meadow 1% Conifer-dominated forest and woodland (xeric-mesic) 21% Developed 21%Agriculture 23% Land Cover: Bozeman and Surroundings 656 94 adapt Strategies 4.1: Create environmental standards for acquisition and management appropriate to each landscape type. Environmental standards will provide much needed guardrails for decision making that ensures that the City has the capacity to purchase, improve, and appropriately maintain various park landscapes. ◊ Create an environmental management and design best practices toolkit. Pull best practices from past plans and local manuals as a guide, like the 2017 Gallatin Valley Hazard Mitigation Plan, 2018 Climate Vulnerability and Resilience Strategy, and 2020 Bozeman Climate Plan among others. ◊ Consider a rating system to set goals and benchmarks and evaluate progress. Rather than starting from scratch, the City can look to existing environmental standards and benchmark systems like SITES. This program provides clear guidance for standards and also connects environmental outcomes with community benefit. The standards should include tools for reduced fire risk, drought management, shade, and flood adaptability. ◊ Require developments to provide a parkland and natural resource analysis coinciding with the trails/greenway layer to facilitate the connection and continuity of natural resource areas (black bear and sandhill crane pathways) 657 95 4.2: Promote sustainable trail and park uses to positively impact natural areas. Parks are ideal places to prioritize environmental restoration and build awareness of natural systems. This can be accomplished by planting native vegetation, incorporating trails that immerse people in nature while staying on paths, reducing the use of machinery or chemicals in maintenance processes that can impact water and air quality, and communicating the ecosystem service values of natural areas. ◊ Encourage sustainable trail design and maintenance through the PRAT Design and Maintenance Manual. ◊ Establish an awareness campaign for considerate park and trails use within natural areas. Well-intentioned visitors should always stay on marked trails to protect wildlife habitats and reduce negative impacts to native vegetation, including ecological degradation from heavy foot traffic off designated paths. Successful awareness campaigns are accessible to young audiences and provide a balance of friendly, clear messaging with facts that reinforce the importance of abiding by park rules. Campaigns that reinforce the relationship between dog owner behavior and intended or unintended outcomes should also be considered. Refer to Strategy 1.3 for more information about programs to support a dog owner and dog etiquette program. ◊ Train and hire staff in sustainable land management practices. Consider creating a park ranger program or partnering with an existing city security program to monitor appropriate park and trail use. 658 96 The program could be expanded to include volunteer programs with residents interested in invasive species management, riparian corridor enhancement, or trail maintenance. 4.3: Promote the protection and enhancement of intact, contiguous critical lands through parkland acquisition ◊ Identify large areas of significant ecosystem benefit in areas of future City expansion and identify funding mechanisms or partnerships for acquisition. The Park and Recreation Department’s mission focuses on recreation experiences for people. While the Department does own many natural areas and works to maintain the land sustainably, the purchase of public lands that limit public access are not aligned with that mission unless well- integrated into the design of the park. In order to maintain the net open land, focus cash-in-lieu and other funding on acquisition. ◊ Allow watercourse setbacks, wetlands, and other priority conservation lands and similar acreage to contribute to dedication requirements in new developments if the project also includes community benefit improvements. As of 2022, land dedication in new developments is limited to upland parcels that enable active uses, however these same dedication requirements do not include improvements to the park beyond irrigation infrastructure, sod, and perimeter trees and sidewalks.. Incorporating critical habitats, riparian corridors, and wetlands into a portion of the land dedication requirement will enable the City to take on unified management of critical lands and increase the development’s responsibility to improve adjacent areas for more active adapt Strategies 659 97 uses with more elements than previously required. Not only will this change to dedication encourage responsible long- term stewardship by the City, it will also reduce the burden on maintenance staff to mow large undeveloped open space parcels. ◊Direct funding outside the City in areas of critical natural resource benefit to prevent net loss of open land. 4.4: Expand nature play and programming. ◊Find more ways for people and children to interact with wetlands, waterways and forests. The Parks and Recreation Department should develop a metric similar to the “10-minute walk” for unstructured play areas or ”wild” spaces. The City should frame nature play as intergenerational, or as spaces that allow people of all ages to be wild. The park system as a whole should mirror the greater natural context of Bozeman and include “wild” natural plantings, outdoor recreation, and places to pause and enjoy nature for all. 4.5: Emphasize water conservation, stormwater management, and best land management practices in park and facility capital projects. In May of 2022, the City Commission enacted permanent watering restrictions to curb irrigation of lawns and landscape, which often use half of all city water in the summer months and the Parks Division followed suit. The Park Division’s participation in achieving and demonstrating water conservation strategies will make it more difficult to irrigate parks and fields with large swaths of lawns. It also provides an opportunity for Parks and Recreation to think differently about water use and find creative ways to maintain the same high quality spaces while prioritizing water management needs. Best practices need to develop specific design guildelines and management for wetlands, soccer fields, and other park or natural spaces to be improved for sustainability and climate metrics. Case Study Boulder Public Library and Boulder Creek Pathway When the Boulder Public Library was moved to its current location along the Boulder Creek Path, improvements were made to the path, adjacent creek and a new nature playground was incorporated into the project, next to the new library site. The balance of active, children- centered uses and protection of an important creek corridor highlighted the City of Boulder’s approach to reinvestment and critical habitat protection. 660 98 ◊ Create standards for low water or drought tolerant irrigation infrastructure. Prioritize simple irrigation systems over advanced systems to reduce unnecessary water waste. Install flexible irrigation systems that are easy to manage, maintain, and replace if needed. Irrigating planting beds and trees during the vegetation’s establishment period will greatly increase the chances of survival for the planting and the planting’s lifespan. ◊ Increase the amount of drought tolerant and native vegetation and trees in the park system. Work with the Montana Master Gardener Program and other like minded organizations to confirm and update plant selection guidance, share low water best practices with city staff, and lead workshops with community members to promote residential drought tolerant landscape. 4.6 Align Staffing Plan with the Above Recommendations ◊ Enhance riparian areas and wetland corridors within existing and new parks through the design manual adapt Strategies 661 99662 100 INCREASE staff and resources to benefit the community. Goal 5 To fully care for Bozeman’s parks, trails and facilities and to provide the most inclusive experiences for the community, the City needs to build internal capacity and resources internally. Today, the City is managing increased maintenance of parks alongside the management, activation, and investment of existing and new parks and facilities with a small staff. Increasing staff and City resources can elevate the quality of the City’s operations and ensure that Bozeman’s community has equitable access to high- quality spaces and programs. To start, the City needs to ensure that the capabilities and capacity of its current staff match the department’s needs. 663 101664 102 increase Strategies 5.1: Attract and retain staff to effectively support the needs of Bozeman’s parks, programs, and trails. The design and upkeep needs of parks and facilities and the growing variety of programs offered by the Department increasingly require a larger staff. Currently, the Department has 54 FTE employees, which is far below staffing numbers of the City’s peer communities. The City needs to increase staff capacity now, while simultaneously looking to the future. As needs and offerings grow, the Department must constantly reassess and adapt its staffing to maintain efficiency and meet the community expectations. ◊ Create intentional strategy to address hiring gaps directly. Work with the City’s Human Resources Department to actively and efficiently recruit qualified staff to fill open positions. Human Resources has already responded to position gaps with signing bonuses and hourly wage increases, and is positioned to do more to connect Department staffing needs to important programs, like lifeguards and aquatics. The Department will also need to be proactive about on- boarding and training new staff who need to develop the skills necessary to fill the roles they are hired for.. A training program can be developed to specifically address needed skills, and encourage staff growth through the Department. Alongside clear communication and training of roles, the Department should shed any tasks historically given to programming staff, including janitorial or administrative tasks, that are not core to the reason for their hiring. ◊ Conduct annual staff surveys to assess job satisfaction, staff development, staffing levels, and work environment. 665 103 Assign a lead investigator within the Department to summarize surveys and share high level takeaways Department-wide. The Department should incorporate those takeaways into future policies and projects to appropriate retain existing staff, and attract future staff. ◊ Provide regular training to ensure that existing staff develop the skills to perform their duties and grow within their roles. For example, if the City is accepting more watercourse setbacks as dedicated parkland, the overall maintenance is likely reduced but is much different from mowing turf grass because its management will require different types of equipment and technical skills. ◊ Conduct an in-depth operational assessment including a staffing plan to define roles and responsibilities and to strategically allocate funding. For example, if the City is accepting more watercourse setbacks as dedicated parkland, the overall maintenance is likely reduced but is much different from mowing turf grass because its management will require different types of equipment and technical skills. 5.2: Continue to refine and communicate the Bozeman Parks and Trails Special District In May 2020, the City created the Bozeman Parks and Trails Special District. The purpose of the District is to equitably invest and manage much of the City’s publicly and privately owned open space land. One of the key components of the District is the transition of maintenance of privately owned, publicly accessible lands to City management. five ways to improve hiring process 1. Create and improve job descriptions 2. Communicate with applicants in multiple channels 3. Post job in many databases 4. Center training/ development as part of the job 5. Move quickly to respond to applicants and potential hires 666 104 increase Strategies In order for the effective management and maintenance of these spaces, the City now levies assessments that will benefit all City- owned or managed parks and trails. As the City works to transition to this new structure, it is imperative that the City sets expectations with communities through a variety of communication methods. ◊Develop a dashboard to share successes and communicate how resources are being allocated. The online dashboard can live on the Parks and Recreation webpage, and will include updates regarding District implementation and improvements, along with responses to frequently asked questions. Start by comparing costs and benefits of current maintenance district structure against Department desires for building out staff capacity including reduced contract reliance, increased supervision, redundancy with HOA maintenance, etc. Create a ticket system for the Community Enhancement application program and publicly track requests from community members regarding the District program. Using the seeclickfix program as a model, share what parks and open spaces are included within the Maintenance District and include tags in spaces where questions have been asked and responded to. The dashboard could include a Frequently Asked Questions document that is shared with key stakeholders, including property managers, Homeowners associations, developers and residents. ◊Undertake a drive time analysis to determine the time maintenance staff spends driving during a typical day. Ensure maintenance district oversight and work to limit the amount of drive time (ideally to no more than an hour daily) to increase productivity and reduce the cost of maintenance and associated expenses such as fuel. 667 105 Use and communicate the highest standards of maintenance (Per NRPA’s maintenance standards), with the PRAT’s maintenance and design manual as a guide. 5.3: Develop a philosophy and policies for cost recovery and revenue generation. The Department does not currently have a broad-based cost- recovery plan that could be used as a guideline for setting fees and systematic resource allocation; however, there is appetite to adopt a comprehensive cost-recovery philosophy, which can provide guidance for prioritizing core program areas, setting fees and charges, identifying tax subsidy levels, and allocating resources effectively and efficiently. ◊Establish cost recovery targets. The Department’s average annual cost recovery, or the calculated percentage of aggregate costs in relation to the revenues generated from programs and services, is 34.6%. As context, the offering of an activity or delivery of a service would achieve 100% cost recovery if the fees charged generated revenue sufficient to cover all associated costs related to the operation of the program. In order to increase the percentage of cost recovery to a new target, the Department should identify a range of cost recovery targets related to individual activity and service categories. Once the range has been established, adjust fees within that service category accordingly and monitor the program or service’s cost recovery annually. ◊Adjust fees and pricing to balance revenue generation with community accessibility. Departments typically subsidize activities for youth, teens, and seniors more than adult activities. Bozeman should also consider subsidies to programs with higher participation by low-income residents, or scholarships in programs in which “Create an online "suggestion box" for people to pin their ideas or maintenance concerns onto a platform” - Community member feedback during August pop-up event 668 106 affordability or willingness to pay are a barrier for low income families and other underrepresented demographics. ◊Create pricing strategies for different audiences based on a variety of factors that take into account existing fees, affordability, and program attractiveness. The following are common pricing factors the Department should consider when developing an approach to updating fees and charges: ◊Cost to offer the program (limited direct costs only) ◊History of fees charged ◊Perceived ability and willingness to pay ◊Number of participants per class/activity ◊Affordability for target audience ◊Ability to attract participants increase Strategies 669 107670 112 Parks Implementation Guidance Active Transportation Implementation Guidance Design and maintenance Manual in this chapter6. how do we get there? 671 113 Parks Implementation Guidance Successful implementation of the strategies and projects identified by the Parks, Recreation and Active Transportation Plan requires balancing and addressing community aspirations, partner and stakeholder goals, and the Department’s mission and vision. The following build on the strategies and actions identified in the PRAT plan document and serve as first steps the Department and the City can take to begin a successful and inclusive implementation process. The PRAT Plan is a Framework The vision, goals, strategies, and recommendations should serve as a framework for decision making. When decisions or responses to the Bozeman community are needed, the plan serves as the reference point for decision making and whether or not new issues or responses to the community are of higher importance than what’s been established as existing direction. Because the plan is an integral tool for the Department, it should also be central to employee onboarding. Track Progress: Publicly release the plan online by placing the plan on the Department’s website and on Engage.Bozeman to track plan implementation progress on these sites. The Department can share updates about recommendation implementation progress. Track and share progress with interested partners and community members as well as with key decision makers. At the end of each fiscal year, reflect on the results of the implementation efforts to-date and include continued community engagement and progress made within each big idea. In addition to yearly reviews, the Department should comprehensively reflect on accomplishments to-date and evaluate progress in equitable project completion that achieves the plan’s goals. These comprehensive reviews are an opportunity for Bozeman to refine or change strategies and recommendations to reflect changing community needs and recreation trends. In these reports the Department should provide data and metrics to clearly articulate plan developments and explain project benefits in a way various audiences can understand Identify the Plan Champion(s) Identify a primary staff person (or team) to guide various pieces of the plan’s implementation to ensure success. These staff people are responsible for monitoring progress and works with staff to effectively integrate the plan into the department. A strong candidate or team should be knowledgeable of the planning process, design and community engagement values of the recommendations made by the plan. Additional staff members should also lead specific big ideas. These individuals can manage each recommendation within a big idea to ensure implementation is followed through and communicated with the Plan Champion, project partners, stakeholders and the broader community. 672 114 Commit to Community Goals Engage community members (residents, businesses, Department partners, and non-profit organizations) early and often during the implementation process. A knowledgeable community is the best way to secure support and ensure the project(s) suit the needs of those who will benefit from them. Equity needs to continue to be at the forefront of all conversations and engagement with underresourced communities must also be paramount to the engagement process. The following actions can be used to help get the word out and provide a continuous feedback loop with community members: • Engage the community through maintenance and recreation program staff who interact with the community daily in conversation or through formal feedback methods. • Include a plan progress update in the Urban Parks and Forestry Board agenda to keep staff and stakeholders informed of the plan’s progress. • Guide outreach in an inclusive direction and adapt to changing community desires by using formalized policies for outreach advertising and messaging. • Use strong, clear visuals paired with data and reflections on community input to frame the conversation. • Hold meetings at times and both in person and online that make it possible for all members of the community to participate. • Partner with community leaders and project partners to maintain momentum for the plan. PARTNERS Regular Maintenance and Monitoring Activation and Programming Significant Renovations or New Investments Core Implementer Plan Partner Core Implementer Plan Partner Core Implementer Plan Partner Parks/open spaces Parks and Cemetery Property Owners Associations Parks and Forestry Board Recreation Volunteer organizations; Downtown Bozeman Partnership; Western Transportation Institute; Private Recreation Programmers; HRDC; Leagues Parks Planning & Development; Bozeman Planning Division Private Developers, Land Trusts (e.g. Gallatin Valley Land Trust, Trust for Public Land) Trails/AT System Parks and Cemetery Future Trails Staff; Private maintenance crews to offset staff capacity Parks and Forestry Board Recreation Gallatin Valley Land Trust; Western Transportation Institute; Private Recreation Programmers Parks Planning & Development; Bozeman Planning Division Private Developers, Land Trusts (e.g. Gallatin Valley Land Trust, Trust for Public Land) Buildings/ facilities Facilities Management Recreation; Aquatics Bozeman Libraries; Bozeman School District Parks Planning & Development YMCA, Bozeman Libraries; Bozeman School District Potential Plan Champions 673 115 • Build from the Safe Routes to Parks liaisons program to address language barriers, communication issues, and cultural barriers. Regulations The City of Bozeman enables park acquisition and improvements through the Unified Development Code. The City should use the design manual and the current geographic distribution and gaps in parks and specific park types to dictate what types of investments should be made in different parts of the city, either by the city on city-owned or dedicated land or by developers. The following actions are recommended. • UDC revisions are recommended that support an equitable distribution of elements, park types, and facilities, especially in communities of color, low income communities, and in places where there are gaps in safe, walking access. • Collect copies of all adopted individual park plans. • ·Continue to require that developers prepare individual park master plans for all newly dedicated parkland. • Revise the Unified Development Ordinance to support more connected park spaces and Active Transportation investments. • ·Allocate funds in the City budget for City staff and/or consultants to prepare individual park master plans for existing parks lacking an adopted plan. • Revise and update existing park plans to reflect changing community needs as identified by this process and community feedback. Active Transportation Implementation Implementation is the primary goal of any community plan. However, there are fundamental questions that must be answered to successfully implement a comprehensive active transportation network connecting Bozeman’s parks and recreation facilities. How will new routes and segments be established? Who pays for construction? How will the routes be maintained? What criteria determine prioritization for investment? The foundation of successful implementation is built upon coordination and cooperation between the City, landowners, developers, non-profit organizations, and Bozeman’s citizens. Coordination beyond Bozeman and its city limits are also critical to ensure the plan’s active transportation efforts align with those in Gallatin County as outlined in the 2020 Triangle Trails Plan. The implementation strategies focus on network construction and route maintenance. As emphasized throughout this plan, properly maintaining existing routes is equally important to constructing new ones. The primary implementation components for both construction and maintenance include: • Methods: Various methods need to be used to construct and maintain Bozeman’s active transportation network • Regulations: City regulations must efficiently guide route construction within future subdivisions, private development, public transportation projects, and specifically wayfinding elements 674 116 • Policies: City procedures and policies need to align with the goals of establishing and maintaining a robust active transportation network • Standards: Clear standards for route construction and maintenance must be established and coordinated between jurisdictions and partners • Funding: Multiple sources of financing for both construction and maintenance must be identified and leveraged • Prioritization: Strategic criteria need to be utilized to establish annual and long-term priorities for route construction and maintenance network Construction Active transportation facility construction is needed throughout the community for several key reasons: extending existing routes; closing gaps in the existing network; upgrading an existing segment from one typology to another; and providing entirely new routes. This plan recommends construction projects meeting all four of these needs. Methods A variety of methods will be employed to construct new routes and segments of the active transportation network. Which method for a given construction project will be most appropriate will depend on facility type, location, responsible parties, and funding sources. Anchor Routes and Shared Use Paths Anchor routes and shared use paths are typically, but not always, aligned with street corridors. Therefore, the most logical method for constructing new shared use paths is to incorporate them into street improvement and construction projects. These projects are usually planned and funded by the City of Bozeman or Montana Department of Transportation, but occasionally are part of large private developments. The “Path to the M” is an example of a significant shared use path construction project involving multiple government jurisdictions and several non-profit organizations. Connector Paths Connectors can be constructed using the widest range of methods. Often, they need to be constructed with private property owners as required by Bozeman Unified Development Code. Connector paths and associated wayfinding can be planned and budgeted as a part of street improvement or construction projects. Lastly, non-profit partners may also construction new connectors. Neighborhood Trails Trails are typically constructed in conjunction with private development. Therefore, they are primarily dictated by the Unified Development Code. Regulations The City of Bozeman requires active transportation improvements through the Unified Development Code, Section 38.400.110 Transportation Pathways 675 117 and Section 38.420.110 Recreation Pathways. There are also design and construction standards for some active transportation facilities within the City’s public work standards. The following actions are recommended. • New development, regardless of type, should the required to construct any active transportation facility identified in this plan. The UDC should be reviewed to ensure to this is clearly required. • Several other UDC revisions are recommended in Item 2 and Item 4 within the UDC appendix. This includes allowing all active transportation facility typologies to be located within watercourse setbacks and allowing certain facility corridors to count towards a project’s parkland requirements. • The City should revise its Transportation and Engineering standards to include all of the active transportation facilities identified in this plan and the corresponding specifications. Policies Building the comprehensive active transportation network requires a variety of aligned policies to ensure efficient implementation. A review of existing policies should be completed to ensure they support the recommendations in this plan. The following actions are recommended. • Replace the routes proposed by the PROST Plan with those proposed in the PRAT Plan in the City GIS Community Development and Infrastructure Viewers. • For the PRAT Plan routes added to the City GIS include a data layer like the “View Additional Resources” layer currently available for existing facilities to provide basic specifications of the proposed routes. • Continue to engage developers and educate them about the PRAT Plan routes, facility classifications, design standards, and maintenance requirements. Ensure the PRAT Plan is readily available and directly referenced in Community Development Department entitlement process materials. • Revise policies and procedures to reference the Triangle Trails Plan and the Triangle Transportation Plan. • Develop policies in conjunction with Gallatin County and the City of Belgrade to review proposed network facilities adjacent to jurisdictional boundaries and identify opportunities to partner on the construction of new routes. • The City should include the active transportation component of the PRAT Plan within the scope of establishing a Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). Funding Financing the construction of a comprehensive active transportation network will require a long-term commitment from the City and its partners. A variety of funding sources will be necessary to implement the route construction proposed in this plan. Different funding mechanisms will apply to each facility typology. 676 118 Numerous State and Federal grants are available annually to assist with active transportation facility construction. These grant funds are awarded on a competitive basis and demand often exceeds allocation. While grants are not a reliable source of funding, they are worth pursuing. An overview of applicable grants is included below. The purpose of the future Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) is to coordinate transportation planning. The MPO may be an option to assist with the planning, coordination, and funding for active transportation route construction. New shared use paths that align with City or State rights-of-way can be designed and constructed as streets and roads are improved or built. Therefore, the funding could come from several sources or a combination thereof including Montana Department of Transportation, City of Bozeman, private developers, and grants. Connector paths are a critical component of a complete active transportation network and can be funded similarly to, and potentially in conjunction with, shared use path projects. The following actions are recommended. • Add prioritized shared use path and connector path projects to the Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) • Allocate an annual portion of the City’s street construction budget to build shared use paths and critical connector paths • Use Cash-in-Lieu of Parkland and Parks District funds for constructing routes and installing wayfinding that are part of park and recreation facilities • Include Bozeman’s active transportation network and plan into the scope of the future Metropolitan Planning Organization • Identify potential State and Federal grants for proposed shared use and connector path projects on an annual basis. Work with community partners where appropriate. • Coordinate with other jurisdictions and partners to secure matching funds and improve competitiveness of active transportation grant applications. Neighborhood trail construction will likely be incorporated as part of future residential and commercial development projects. These improvements will be completed by the developer as part of a private project’s required infrastructure improvements. The Gallatin Valley Land Trust (GVLT) has partnered with the City to construct numerous neighborhood trails and improve connector trails throughout the community. GVLT will continue to play an important role in the implementation of the PRAT Plan as it relates to trails and outdoor recreation. The following actions are recommended. • Continue to ensure that UDC requirements facilitate the construction of neighborhood trails in a way that connects to the larger active transportation network. • Use Cash-in-Lieu of Parkland funds for constructing trails that are part of park and recreation facilities. 677 119 • Continue to partner with GVLT to develop and maintain important neighborhood trails. State and Federal Grants Transportation Alternatives (TA) Set-Aside from the Surface Transportation Block Grant Program (STBG) The Surface Transportation Block Grant program (STBG) provides flexible funding that may be used by States and municipalities for projects to improve the conditions and performance on any Federal-aid highway, bridge and tunnel projects on any public road, pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, and transit capital projects. The recent Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, also known as the “Bipartisan Infrastructure Law” (BIL), expanded and reformed this critical program which supports smaller biking and walking projects. The act also increased the size of the transportation alternatives funding set aside. Rebuilding American Infrastructure and Sustainability and Equity (RAISE): The RAISE program to help urban and rural communities move forward on projects that modernize roads, bridges, transit, rail, ports, and intermodal transportation and make our transportation systems safer, more accessible, more affordable, and more sustainable. Previously known as BUILD and TIGER discretionary grants, these competition awards support the development of transportation infrastructure. Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) more than doubled the funding the RAISE Program in 2022. Federal Lands Access Program (FLAP) This program provides funding to improve transportation facilities that provide access to, are adjacent to, or are located within Federal lands. The Access Program supplements State and local resources for public roads, transit systems, and other transportation facilities, with an emphasis on high- use recreation sites and economic generators. Recreational Trails Program (RTP) This is a financial assistance program of the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). The RTP provides funds to the States for a variety of uses including construction of new recreational trails and acquisition of easements and fee simple title for recreational trail corridors. Utilize Community partners to increase likely hood of grant funding. Montana Trail Stewardship Program This program is administered by Fish, Wildlife, and Parks Department and can be used for the construction and maintenance of natural trails or shared use paths. The maximum award is $75,000 and approximately $1.67 million were dispersed to over 30 projects in 2022. Utilize Community partners to increase likely hood of grant funding. This can also fund nordic ski grooming and equipment. Prioritization The PRAT Plan proposes an ambitious slate of new active transportation routes to extend and connect the network. The construction of new segments and routes will take years and considerable funding. Therefore, it is important to develop and utilize a method to prioritize the proposed improvement 678 120 projects. This plan includes a weighted prioritization matrix template utilizing the criteria listed below. The following actions are recommended. • Develop a methodology for prioritizing potential active transportation network projects based on the following criteria: • Importance of active transportation connection or route as outlined in the PRAT Plan • Importance to the Parks & Recreations Department facilities, operations, and objectives of the PRAT Plan • Importance to the Bozeman Area Transportation Master Plan • Importance to the Bozeman Climate Action Plan • Importance related to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion goals • Opportunity to leverage partnerships and funding sources • Create, and annually revise, a rolling 5-year construction plan similar to the City’s CIP • Add larger high-priority projects into the City’s CIP Network Maintenance Maintaining active transportation routes that are safe and accessible for users of all ages and abilities is a high priority. In addition, adequate maintenance is critical to maximizing year-round utilization. The City needs to establish annual and long- term maintenance plans that includes a deferred maintenance analysis. There are three essential elements to properly maintaining an active transportation network. First, establish minimum standards for maintenance. Next, determine maintenance responsibility for each segment of the network. Lastly, identify the various sources to finance the necessary maintenance. Methods Developing a comprehensive maintenance strategy will require considering various surface types, locations, responsible parties, and available funding. Anchor Routes and Shared Use Paths Anchor routes and shared use paths located within street rights-of-way are typically maintained by the corresponding jurisdiction. One challenge is achieving consistent maintenance expectations and standards between the City, County, and State. Connector Paths The maintenance of Connectors not only depends on the responsible party but also on the surface type each route. 679 121 Neighborhood Trails Despite being smaller, trails require a considerable amount of maintenance depending on location, the quality of construction, and the amount of use. Neighborhood trails are typically maintained by neighborhood associations, HOAs, the City, or GVLT. Regulations The ability of the City to regulate maintenance of active transportation routes is limited. The City should consider ways to require routes owned or managed by private parties to be maintained according to established standards. The following actions are recommended. ◊Strengthen requirements for residential subdivisions, commercial developments, and other privately held routes to be adequately maintained according to standards adopted by the City. Policies Maintenance of active transportation routes in Bozeman is currently managed through a variety of resources, including private property owners, homeowner associations, community groups, non-profit partners, the City, and the Montana Department of Transportation. Clarifying responsibilities for maintenance and establishing standards will help ensure the financial investment developing a complete network is protected and enhanced in future years. The following actions are recommended. ◊Establish a comprehensive maintenance plan that includes minimum standards for upkeep, repairs, and replacement ◊Conduct a comprehensive deferred maintenance analysis of each route identifying the current condition, upkeep and repair needs, and sections needing to be rebuilt ◊Establish a maintenance template for the City, property owners, and partners to develop schedule tasks and estimate costs ◊Review and clarify how the Bozeman Parks Maintenance District can support the maintenance of the network Standards General maintenance standards for evaluating needs for surface care, repairs, safety precautions, and managing adjacent landscaping should be developed for and consistently applied to all network typologies. In addition to annual and long-term tasks, seasonal maintenance of shared use paths is essential to accommodating year-round active transportation. Paved paths must have the snow removed frequently during the winter and be swept of grit and debris each spring. The following actions are recommended. ◊Develop a comprehensive maintenance plan including detailed standards by typology that ensure a high-level of safety, accessibility, and utilization. 680 122 Below are recommended routine and periodic maintenance tasks based on surface type. Paved Surfaces—Routine maintenance activities: ◊ Regular sweeping to remove debris, gravel, and other hazardous items ◊ Regular snow removal during winter months ◊ Inspect and repair pavement surface problems (seal cracks, grind down ridges, cut back tree roots, repair pavement) ◊ Prune adjacent and overhanging vegetation to reduce encroachment or cause sight distance problems ◊ Treating noxious weeds along corridor ◊ Mowing trail edges if applicable (keep vegetation height low along trail) ◊ Clearing drainage features to ensure proper function Paved Surfaces—Periodic maintenance activities: ◊ Coordinate and schedule pavement overlays as part of adjacent road maintenance ◊ Addition of surfacing material depending on condition (2-3 years) ◊ Re-grading to improve cross-slope or out- slope for improved drainage ◊ Improvement of transitions with sidewalks or streets, restripe crosswalks and other markers ◊ Repair or replace wayfinding, stop control signs and other elements ◊ Restripe crosswalks and other markers Natural Surfaces—Routine maintenance activities: ◊ Removing encroaching vegetation from trail tread (grading, chemical treatment) ◊ Prune adjacent and overhanging vegetation to reduce encroachment or cause sight distance problems ◊ Treating noxious weeds along corridor ◊ Mowing trail edges if applicable (keep vegetation height low along trail) ◊ Clearing drainage features to ensure proper function ◊ Flood or rain damage repair: silt clean up, culvert clean out, etc. ◊ Bridge/culvert inspection, clearing/repair ◊ Map/signage post condition inspection, and vandalism repair ◊ Assessing need for sign/map updates or replacement Natural Surfaces—Periodic maintenance activities: ◊ Yearly trail evaluation to determine the need for minor repairs, identification of erosion damage, need for improved drainage ◊ Addition of surfacing material depending on condition (2-3 years) ◊ Re-grading to improve cross-slope or out- slope for improved drainage ◊ Improvement of transitions with sidewalks or streets, restripe crosswalks and markers ◊ Repair or replace wayfinding, stop control signs and other elements ◊ Restripe crosswalks and other markers 681 123 Funding Like construction, the maintenance of Bozeman’s active transportation is funded by a variety of entities including the City, Montana Department of Transportation, non-profit partners, and private property owners. There are more maintenance needs than committed funding which leads to a backlog of repairs and overall degradation of accessibility and utilization. According to the Rails to Trail Conservancy, annual maintenance costs on average range from $1,000 to $2,000 per trail mile, depending upon the surface. Therefore, average annual funding required to maintain Bozeman’s 178 miles of paths and trails is approximately $267,000. The funding needed to adequately maintain the network will only increase as new extensions and routes are constructed. To meet this financial commitment, the City and its partners must proactively account for the necessary funding to execute the annual and long-term maintenance plans and aggressively commit the dollars. The following actions are recommended. Ensure that a significant portion of the Parks and Trails Maintenance District funds are dedicated to path and trail maintenance Allocate an annual portion of the City’s street maintenance budget to repair shared use paths and paved connector paths Include Bozeman’s active transportation network and plan into the future Metropolitan Planning Organization budget Prioritization Addressing the maintenance backlog of existing active transportation network will take years and considerable funding. Therefore, it is important to develop and utilize a method to prioritize the needed upkeep and repair projects. This plan includes a weighted prioritization matrix template utilizing the criteria listed below. The following actions are recommended. Develop a methodology for prioritizing potential maintenance projects based on the following criteria: •Area of deferred maintenance that poses a public safety risk •Area of deferred maintenance that restricts equitable access •Area of deferred maintenance that reduces utilization •Highly utilized routes •Ability to partner and/or leverage creative funding opportunities 682 124 Looking Forward The PRAT plan sets forth an ambitious vision and series of goals for the growth of the system that are driven by community voices. These goals are the product of rigorous community conversations, multiple surveys, in-depth analysis, and stakeholder visioning. Going forward, the City should use the plan as a tool to assist in decision making as it relates to investment strategies and resource allocation to ensure barriers to participation are removed and create a more equitable system. Finally, the PRAT plan should serve as a unifying document that helps align the needs of the community with the priorities and actions of the City in order to continue to grow an inclusive, loved, and connected park system. Amendments to the Parks, Recreation, and Active Transportation Plan The PRAT Plan should be reviewed and revised as needed every 5 years. Because the PRAT Plan is coordinated with the growth policy, Bozeman Strategic Plan and other city documents, the City’s growth policy, and in light of the time and effort invested in the preparation of this plan,staff should follow the procedures for growth policy amendments and other relevant state laws for revisions. Amendments to Individual Park Master Plans Since adoption of the PROST in 2007, there has been a goal to update park master plans for existing individual parks within the system. With the adoption of the PRAT, this effort should be undertaken on a neighborhood or other sub-area level to forecast improvement needs for the Department, partners and new developments to implement the recommendations in the PRAT and changing community needs. The individual park master plans should be conceptual in nature and will be used to: ◊implement new design guidelines as identified in the PRAT Design Manual for the individual park type ◊analyze site-specific potential and existing conditions ◊forecast what types of improvements are needed in individual parks to improve the balance of offerings across all neighborhoods and to eliminate access barriers. ◊target appropriate grant funds and partners. Using neighborhood-level or other subareas, such as Urban Renewal Districts, as the boundary for these amendments, this type of assessment will not only guide investments in existing parks, it will illustrate needs that parks in new developments can meet. Parks and Recreation staff should work with the Urban Parks and Forestry Board and the City’s Communications and Engagement staff to design appropriate community engagement for the scale and scope of these amendments. Cash-in-lieu of Parkland (CILP) funding can be used for planning efforts and would be an appropriate source of funding for this effort because it would set up future CILP and Improvements-in-Lieu of Parkland (IILP). 683 Design Manual 684 Unifying principles The following principles guide the development and maintenance of City-owned or managed parks with the goal of creating a safe, accessible, sustainable, and long lasting system of parks, trails, and facilities. These principles should be used to ensure the City’s capital improvements and decisions about park and facility maintenance align with the goals and vision laid out by the Parks, Recreation, and Active Transportation Plan. Ecology & Environment The City should strive to maintain or enhance the ecological function and resiliency of its open space, trail, and recreation assets. Accessibility & Inclusivity City parks, facilities, and trails should strive to exceed requirements for accessibility to engage visitors of differing abilities. Durability & Efficiency Materials, furnishings, and landscaping used to construct or improve City assets should be able to withstand frequent and intense use and limited maintenance. Equipment should sourced from sustainable materials and should require typical, easy to access replacement parts. 685 Typical Assets Identifiers 686 The following standards identify important elements and facilities that should be included in the design, construction, and maintenance of parks and open spaces to align with the vision and goals of the PRAT Plan. The standards are broken out into two topics - systemwide requirements, which include investments in physical accessibility, lighting, and landscape elements; and guidance for design and maintenance by park type. As community needs and trends change, this guidance should continue to provide a relevant and consistent framework for the design, renovation of future parks and open spaces. System-wide Park Standards 687 • Reduce road and walkway widths to minimum acceptable dimensions. • Reduce the size/width of parking spaces to NACTO minimums and limit the number of parking stalls. • If an entrance or route is not accessible, install signage that indicates the next closest accessible entry. Trees Trees provide shade and reduce the impacts of urban heat island on hot days. Trees also sequester carbon and help to reduce soil erosion through their root systems. Trees contribute to the natural look and feel of urban parks year round. The City should take care to protect existing trees through proactive monitoring and maintenance. New trees should be planted in communities with low tree coverage and to plan for successful succession of the canopy within older parks and open spaces. The City should ensure diverse species selection in parks and city-owned open spaces. The City should also advocate for more street trees at the perimeter of parks and facilities. Required Facilities The following amenities and furnishings are important facilities to include in all parks and open spaces to provide clear and cohesive identity, encourage safe access, and enhance park enjoyment. Barrier free/Accessible paths Parks should be made accessible to a wide range of visitors, including persons with varying abilities, and they must connect safely and efficiently to surrounding transit stops and neighborhood streets. Accessible routes often result in paved connections, which can increase impervious surfaces, negatively impact stormwater capture, and increase heat island effect. To reduce these negative impacts on accessible paths and parking needs, consider the following: • Use semipermeable or permeable surfaces that meet or exceed ADA/Universal Design requirements. • Share parking with neighboring uses, like schools. Milwaukee Path - Missoula cross city trail 688 Signage Clear, consistent, and accessible signage and wayfinding helps to communicate what parks, trails, and facilities have to offer and reinforce the City’s identity and role in maintaining these community spaces. There are many types of signs that should be considered in Bozeman parks and facilities, depending on the park or facility’s use. • Informational signage clearly communicates the City’s relationship in owning or maintaining the park or facility. • Directional signage and wayfinding helps to direct visitors to destinations within parks and facilities, and will set expectations about distances between destinations. • Interpretive signage can be used as an educational feature to describe the park’s historic, cultural, or environmental significance. Seating Seating and benches give park users a place to rest, socialize, and enjoy their parks. Benches, picnic tables and other seating should be prioritized along highly trafficked paths and parks, and in natural spaces. Consider age-friendly bench designs that prioritize back support and arm rests as well as benches and picnic tables with adjacent wheelchair spaces. Trash & Recycling Placing trash and recycling receptacles along major network paths helps keep pathways, corridors, and their surroundings clean and more enjoyable for their users. 689 Enhancing Amenities These amenities are not critical for a functional active transportation network but enhance the user experience, safety, and cleanliness, and are often greatly desired by the community. Lighting Pedestrian scaled lighting should be considered at entrances and in parking lots or fields of larger parks, many special use facilities, and other parks used throughout the year. Adequate lighting should also be considered along popular pathways and trails through parks. Pedestrian scaled lighting increases safety for users throughout the year. Shade Structures Shade structures range in size, materiality, cost and purpose. They include arbors, pergolas, gazebos, pavilions, and canvas tensile structures over playgrounds and bleachers at fields. These structures should be used in places where shade trees are limited and where shade trees conflict with the particular park use, e.g. playing field or meadow. Comfort stations/Restrooms In larger parks like regional parks and certain special use facilities, permanent, ADA accessible restrooms should be considered. Comfort stations are appropriate as temporary facilities tied to large events, festivals, or other large gathering. Bike Racks Bike racks provide reliable bike storage options at parks with access to major trails and pathways. As stated in the Active Transportation section, providing ample bike racks reduces potential issues of bikes being locked inappropriately to trees, park furniture, and private property. Bike Repair Stations Bike repair stations can be helpful for bicyclists if they are caught with an unexpected flat tire or need to make an adjustment to their bike during a ride. As noted in the Active Transportation section, bike repair stations should be located along major bike corridors and in major parks that are popular for bike users. Dog Waste Stations Dog stations provide pet waste bags and a trash receptacle for dog owners that use parks. Installing dog stations along popular dog walking areas can be beneficial in maintaining clean parks and trails. Water Fountains Outdoor public water fountains along pathways are often desired by active users. However, upkeep of these amenities is extensive which reduces their practicality in many situations. Providing public water fountains will be deliberate decisions that will hinge on specific locations and circumstances. Picnic Tables Picnic tables can be appropriate along pathways near community hubs. They provide opportunities for a variety of social activities that can be enjoyed outdoors such as picnics, games, and conversations. Irrigation 690 Design + Maintenance Guidance by Park Type The following principles guide the development and maintenance of City-owned or managed parks with the goal of creating a safe, accessible, sustainable, and long lasting system of parks, trails, and facilities. These principles should be used to ensure the City’s capital improvements and decisions about park and facility maintenance align with the goals and vision laid out by the Parks, Recreation, and Active Transportation Plan. Pocket Parks Neighborhood Parks Community Parks Special Use Parks Natural Areas Natural Areas within Parks Linear Parks 691 Special Use Natural Areas Community Neighborhood Pocket Linear Roads Buildings City Boundary Railroad Streams Lakes & Reservoirs Park Types 692 Pocket Parks are used to address limited, isolated or unique recreational needs. They are typically 1 acre or less in size and contain amenities such as recreational opportunities for young children with slides, swings, spring toys and the like. They may also function as landscaped public use areas in commercialized parts of town, and serve as a destination within a 5 minute walk of a neighborhood. The service area for a pocket park is a ¼-mile radius around the park in a residential setting. Pocket Parks 10 Acres | 20 Parks Annie St & Cottage Park Ln Baxter Square Black Ave Pocket Park Bosel Park Childrens Memorial Gardens Cotton Park Ln Creekside Park Equestrian Park Farmhouse Ln & Little Cottage Ln Lewis and Bark Dog Park Milkhouse N Pocket Park Milkhouse S Pocket Park North Meadows Park Northeast Neighborhood Park Norton East Ranch Subdivision Park Pinnacle Star Street Sacajawea Park Sanders Park Soroptomist Park Valley Commons Park Valley Meadows Westglen Park Westlake Community Garden Relevant Parks Soroptimist ParkWestglen Park Tree Canopy Goal Final design manual will include tree canopy goals as percentage per park type. These goals are currently still in progress Placeholder693 Arterial access through residential plots Access to shade and planting Immediate access through sidewalks and residential streets Access to play areas Typical Assets and Design Considerations Program & Use Pocket Parks typically contain amenities such as recreational opportunities for young children with slides, swings, spring toys and the like. Temporary amenities like movable tables and chairs support social activities and gatherings that tie into the daily activities of move active parts of the city. Environmental Benefits Design grading to direct stormwater into planted areas and mitigate the need for regular irrigation. It is important to evaluate the quality of the soils on site in more dense, urban pocket parks to ensure the soil can support increased stormwater volumes. Plant native, hardier plants that can serve as windbreaks that break up wind tunnel effects and to support sensitive low lying plants. Limit paved surfaces and cluster plantings throughout the site to reduce urban heat island effect. Siting & Access Accessibility by way of interconnecting trails, sidewalks, or low-volume residential streets increases use opportunities. Recognizable public access should be provided with at least 50 feet of frontage on a public or approved private street. In terms of size, they are generally between 2,500 square feet and one acre in size. Connections and relationships to the surrounding context are also key to providing an accessible and visually cohesive connection to surrounding buildings, paths, and streets. Connections within and to the park from nearby bike lanes and greenways should be prioritized, especially those that connect into city anchor routes. Curb cuts at street crossings and wayfinding to direct visitors to surrounding amenities, especially downtown, will help orient visitors to various destinations. 694 Neighborhood parks are the basic unit of the park system, and serve as the recreational and social focus of the neighborhood. Focus is on informal recreation for all age groups and geared towards those living within the service area. Neighborhood parks should be centrally located within their service area, with access uninterrupted by non-residential roads and other physical barriers. The service area of a neighborhood park has a ¼- to ½-mile radius. Neighborhood Parks 223 Acres | 34 Parks Alder Creek Centennial Park Cooper Park Creekwood Subdivision Park Diamond Park Enterprise Park Flanders Creek Subdivision Park Four Points Minor Subd. Park Gran Cielo Headlands Park HRDC (West Babcock Park) Icon Park Jarrett Park Legends At Bridger Creek Park M Anderson Park Matthew Matsen Park Meadow Creek Park NE Corner & N Laurel Pkwy New Hyalite View Park Sandan Park South University Distict Southside Park The Lakes At Valley West Park Traditions Subdivision Park Valley Unit Park Valley West Park Walton Homestead Park West Winds Park Westbrook Westfield Park Relevant Parks Centennial Park Valley West Park Tree Canopy Goal Final design manual will include tree canopy goals as percentage per park type. These goals are currently still in progress Placeholder695 Typical Assets and Design Considerations Program & Use Facilities include playgrounds; informal playfields or open space; basketball, tennis and volleyball courts; ice skating; trails; and picnic and sitting areas. Environmental Benefits Similar to the pocket parks and plazas typology, it is imperative to design grading to direct stormwater into planted areas and mitigate the need for regular irrigation. In these active, neighborhood serving parks, investments in low maintenance plantings and shade trees will support community use on hot days and reduce urban heat island effect from surrounding areas. Siting/Access The site should be accessible from throughout its service area by way of interconnecting trails, sidewalks, or low-volume residential streets. Ease of access and walking distance are critical factors in locating a neighborhood park. A neighborhood park should have a minimum of 50 percent frontage on a public or approved private street. Neighborhood parks are generally 3 to 10 acres in size. Leftover parcels of land that are undesirable for development are also generally undesirable for neighborhood parks and should be avoided. It is more cost-effective to select a site with inherent aesthetic qualities, rather than trying to recreate them through extensive development. Connections and relationships within the neighborhood will help to provide accessible and visually cohesive relationships to surrounding community destinations. Connections within and to the park from nearby bike lanes and greenways should be prioritized, especially those that connect into city anchor routes. Curb cuts at street crossings and wayfinding to direct visitors to surrounding amenities, especially downtown, will help orient visitors to various destinations. City Goal of 100% Frontage on Public Roads Central location in residential neighborhoods Flexible Multi-Use Open Spaces Connection to sidewalks, community trails and greenways 696 Community parks are larger in size and serve a broader purpose than neighborhood parks. Their focus is on meeting the recreational needs of the entire community. They allow for group activities and offer other recreational opportunities not feasible – nor perhaps desirable – in a neighborhood park. Community Parks Story Mill Community Park BozemanPond Glen LakeRotary Park Kirk Park 199 Acres | 8 Parks Beall Park Bogert Pond Bozeman Pond Glen Lake Rotary Park Kirk Park Lindley Park Story Mansion Park Story Mill Community Park Relevant Parks Tree Canopy Goal Final design manual will include tree canopy goals as percentage per park type. These goals are currently still in progress Placeholder697 Program & Use Potential recreation facilities include playgrounds; basketball, tennis and volleyball courts; informal ballfields for youth play; ice skating rinks (temporary); swimming pools or swimming beaches; trails, including cross-country ski trails; individual and group picnic/sitting areas; general open space; unique landscapes and features; nature study areas; and ornamental or native plant gardens. Environmental Benefits Similar to the pocket parks and plazas typology, it is imperative to design grading to direct stormwater into planted areas and mitigate the need for regular irrigation. These larger parks can also direct runoff towards designed bioretention systems (e.g., swales and rain gardens). Wherever possible, these parks should increase planting areas that can capture stormwater and support water conservation measures citywide, through low irrigation, native plantings. Siting/Access Optimally, the site should be between 20 and 50 acres in size; however the actual size should be based on the land area needed to accommodate desired uses. The site should be serviced by arterial and collector streets, as well as the community trail system. Parking lots should be provided as necessary to accommodate user access. The site’s natural character should play a very significant role in site selection, with emphasis on sites that preserve unique landscapes within the community and/or provide recreational opportunities not otherwise available. Typical Assets and Design Considerations Recreational Facilities Connection to community trail system Native Planting Areas Arterial / Connector Streets + Parking Access 698 The Special Use classification covers a broad range of parks and recreation facilities oriented toward single-purpose or specialized use. Special uses generally fall into three categories: • Historic/Cultural/Social Sites – Unique local resources offering historical, educational, and cultural opportunities. Examples include historic downtown areas, performing arts facilities, arboretums, ornamental/native plant gardens, sculpture gardens, indoor theaters, public buildings, and amphitheaters. • Indoor Recreation Facilities – Examples include community centers, senior centers, sports stadiums, community theaters, indoor hockey arenas, and indoor swimming pools. • Outdoor Recreation Facilities – Examples include tennis centers, sports complexes, golf courses, disc golf courses, hockey arenas, BMX parks and skate parks. Special Use Parks 201 Acres | 9 Parks Bozeman Sports Park Bronken Park - Soccer Complex Christie Fields North Grand Field Rose Park Snowfill Softball Complex West Babcock Park Westlake BMX Park Relevant Parks Tree Canopy Goal Final design manual will include tree canopy goals as percentage per park type. These goals are currently still in progress Placeholder699 Typical Assets and Design Considerations Program & Use Among the most active recreation places within the City’s park system, these parks and facilities support a range of activities and should be designed to address the desires of community members, national and local recreation trends, and the need for flexibility. Opportunities for active recreation should be expanded to support intended audiences as well as their caregivers, spouses, and spectators. To support extended use of the facilities, these places should support the comfort of all visitors through water fountains, bathrooms, shade trees, benches and accommodations for persons who ave physical disabilities or are neurologically diverse. Siting/Access Recreation need, community interests, the type of facility, and land availability are the primary factors influencing location and size. Special use facilities should be viewed as strategically located community-wide facilities rather than as serving well-defined neighborhoods or areas. The site should be accessible from arterial and collector streets where feasible. Indoor / Outdoor Recreation Facilities Native Plant Gardens Environmental Stewardship Cultural Sites Arterial Road Connections Specific Athletic Asset (for example pump track) Large Athletic Facilities Recreational Facilities 700 Natural resource areas are lands set aside for the preservation of natural resources, remnant landscapes, open space, and visual aesthetics or buffering. Oftentimes, these areas are contained within existing parks, and require a different management approach from more isolated natural areas. For example, Mcleod Park is a neighborhood park with natural areas that have to be well designed and integrated into the park to work alongside existing recreational uses. There are similar examples in West Winds Park and Bronken Park. These lands typically consist of: • Individual sites exhibiting natural resources; • Lands that are unsuitable for development but offer natural resource potential. Examples include parcels with steep slopes and natural vegetation, drainage ways and ravines; and • Protected lands, such as wetlands, riparian areas and ponds. Natural Areas (including those within parks) 184 Acres | 27 Areas Alder Creek Natural Space Allison Park Bridger Creek Park Bronken Park - Natural Space Burke Park Cattail Lake Subdivision Public Park Flanders Creek Subdivision Park Natural Space Grafs East Park Hauser Park Ice House Park Josephine Park Laurel Glen Park Loyal Gardens Subdivision Park Mcleod Park Meadow Creek Subd Public Park Norton East Ranch Sub Park Natural Space Oak Springs Park Access Corridor Peets Hill Shady Lane Public Park Traditions Subdivision Park Natural Space Tuckerman Park Valley West Park Natural Space West Winds Park Natural Space Willow Park Relevant Parks with Natural Areas Baxter Meadows Natural Space Baxter Square Natural Space Cattail Creek Natural Space Ferguson Meadows Natural Space Relevant Standalone Natural Areas Tree Canopy Goal Final design manual will include tree canopy goals as percentage per park type. These goals are currently still in progress Placeholder701 Typical Assets and Design Considerations Program & Use Although natural areas are resource rather than user based, they can provide some recreation opportunities such as trails, and nature viewing and study. They can also function as greenways. Development should be kept to a level that preserves the integrity of the resource. Environmental Benefits Restoration areas should be protected and maintained or expanded. To do this, clear communication and barriers to prevent dumping, walking, or vehicle access to the site should be incorporated into the design of these spaces. Minimize development of hard surfaces, including bike trails and boardwalks, and strategically place them to avoid dissecting, diminishing, or disturbing natural areas within parks. Use the existing types of vegetation community present in natural areas, whether forest, shrubland, meadow, stream, tidal marsh, or wetland to guide the restoration design for adjacent sites and for site expansion within existing parks. These places should include educational information (e.g. signage) that will help visitors understand natural system functions and increase aware of ecosystem benefits. Siting/Access Resource availability and opportunity are the primary factors determining location and size. Typically, when siting a natural area, underutilized areas of parks and areas with vegetation or animal species of concern are ideal places for natural area investment. Access points should be limited and well-signed, and should connect into existing trail networks. Access to greenways, trails and nature viewing opportunities Protection of natural resource areas 702 Linear parks contain pathways that serve a number of important functions: • They tie park components together to form a cohesive park, trail, recreation, and open space system; • They allow for uninterrupted and safe pedestrian and bicycle movement between parks and throughout the community • They contain clear signage that visually connects park components and trails to better wayfinding • They provide an opportunity for resource-based outdoor recreation. Linear Parks Gallagator Linear Park Harvest Creek Park 62 Acres | 24 Parks Babcock Meadows Brookside Park Diamond Estates Public Park Gallagator Linear Park Greenway/Westgate Harvest Creek Langohr Gardens Park North 9th Northern Pacific Addition To Bozeman Oak Meadows Subdivision Park Sourdough Trail Park Spring Meadows Park Sundance Springs Park The Knolls At Hillcrest Park The Knolls At Hillcrest Park Valley Creek Park Village Downtown Park West Meadows Park Westridge East Park Westridge North Park Westridge South Park Relevant Parks Tree Canopy Goal Final design manual will include tree canopy goals as percentage per park type. These goals are currently still in progress Placeholder703 Typical Assets and Design Considerations Program & Use Linear parks can be developed for a variety of different recreational activities. Most notable are hiking, walking, jogging, bicycling and cross- country skiing. Environmental Benefits Linear parks provide connectivity for healthy plant animal species to travel along habitat “corridors”. To support appropriate plant and animal species along these linear parks, the city should encourage native species to migrate to new areas by recreating the conditions of previously established habitat close to the area where expansion is desired. Since these habitat corridors will also naturally support non-native species expansion, it is important to create barriers for the spread of those species. Many linear parks exist along water courses, which presents an opportunity to sensitively invest in riparian edges. Plantings and naturalized landscapes along the water’s edge will support increased fish and other amphibious species habitat. Education signage regarding “rewilding” of these riparian edges should also be considered to raise awareness of these investments. Siting/Access Land availability and opportunity are the primary factors determining location. Many linear parks will follow natural features such as watercourses, while others will follow man-made features such as abandoned railways. Linear parks should be at least 25 feet wide for general trail use, with additional width required for parks used for cross- country skiing. In addition to this minimum width, which linear parks can extend beyond, linear parks should also have requirements to provide specific amenities. Parcels with steep slopes and natural vegetationProtection of natural wetland and ponds Connection to further trail systems 704 Design + Maintenance Guidance For Active Transportation Establishing clear dimensional specifications and construction standards for each path and trail typology is fundamental to building out a highly functioning active transportation network. Below is a basic summary of the key standards for each network typology. The ‘Implementation’ section below provides a detailed breakdown of the recommended dimensional and construction standards. This section of the Design Manual will identify and describe design and maintenance considerations for the following three Active Transportation route types: System-wide Standards Anchor Routes & Shared Use Paths Bike Boulevards Connector Paths Neighborhood Trails 705 Proposed Anchor Route Proposed Shared Use Paths Proposed Commuter Paths Proposed Neighborhood Trails Proposed Bike Boulevards Existing Shared Use Paths Existing Trails City Boundary Proposed Active Transportation Network N1 mile00.5 Growth Boundary Roads Railroad Streams Lakes & Reservoirs Future Parks Parks 706 Standards for the design and construction of all active transportation typologies is critical to successful implementation of the PRAT Plan. The City has existing paved path standards within the Public Work and the PROST Plan contains some standards for natural trails. The existing standards should be reviewed against best practices and guidelines referenced below, revised to create comprehensive standards for each path and trail type, and collocated within a single source such as the Public Works Standards. The recommended standards for construction are divided into three classes based on location, intended use, and preferred maintenance. As uses or intensity change, a route may be upgraded in classification. The standards align with those in the Triangle Trails Plan and reflect similar parameters previous outlined in the Bozeman PROST Plan and the Gallatin County Trails Report and Plan. Paths and trails consist of a central walkable/ridable surface, known as a tread. They have a shoulder located on each side. The tread plus the shoulder is known as the clear width. The height above the route with no obstacles like tree branches is known as the clear height. The following standards are applicable to all city path and trail classifications: • Adequate visibility must be provided for safety. • The minimum acceptable path and trail easement width is 25 feet. • Path and trail entrances will be signed describing the degree of ADA access. • A minimum of 5-foot separation between edge of path to top of slope that is greater than 1V:3H, if not met, a railing must be implemented System-wide AT Standards 707 Required Elements These associated elements, adjacent to physical path networks, are essential for the success of a functional and safe active transportation network. Wayfinding The most critical adjacent network facility is wayfinding. Wayfinding is essential to a robust, highly functioning community active transportation network. A comprehensive wayfinding plan should be adopted and implemented by the City of Bozeman. One, unified wayfinding plan for the entire City of Bozeman will standardize and integrate consistent signage and information across the entire network to allow for intuitive and streamlined user navigation. Lighting on Shared Use Paths For shared use paths to be viable and reliable transportation and recreation corridors throughout the year, proper lighting must be present on all shared use paths. Adequate lighting increases safety for users and allows the paths to be functional throughout the entire day, including commuting hours, during Montana’s dark winter months. Benches Benches are a highly desired facility in public spaces and in corridors along pathways. They give path users a place to rest, socialize, and enjoy the many beautiful environments Bozeman has to offer. Benches should be prioritized along highly trafficked paths and in natural spaces. Bike Racks Bike racks provide reliable bike storage options at network hubs for commuting and recreational bikers alike to securely leave their bike for period of time. Providing ample bike racks reduces potential issues of bikes being locked inappropriately to trees, park furniture, and private property. Bike Repair Stations Bike repair stations can be helpful for bicyclists if they are caught with an unexpected flat tire or need to make an adjustment to their bike during a ride. Bike repair stations should be located along major bike corridors and at major network intersections. Dog Waste Stations Dog stations provide pet waste bags and a trash receptacle for dog owners that use the network. Installing dog stations along popular dog walking areas can be beneficial in maintaining a clean path and trail environment. Trash & Recycling Placing trash and recycling receptacles along major network paths helps keep pathways, corridors, and their surroundings clean and more enjoyable for their users. Enhancing Elements These amenities are not critical for a functional active transportation network but enhance the user experience, safety, and cleanliness, and are often greatly desired by the community. Lighting on other Facilities As described above, lighting should be required along all shared use paths. However, some connector paths and trails may benefit from lighting installations as well if they are highly trafficked, are used as a frequent commuter route, or need added visibility. The need for lighting on these facilities will be addressed on a situational basis. Water Fountains Outdoor public water fountains along pathways are often desired by active users. However, upkeep of these amenities is extensive which reduces their practicality in many situations. Providing public water fountains will be deliberate decisions that will hinge on specific locations and circumstances. Picnic Tables Picnic tables can be appropriate along pathways near community hubs. They provide opportunities for a variety of social activities that can be enjoyed outdoors such as picnics, games, and conversations. 708 These paved pathways connect larger community nodes. They are heavily used with full access and are typically constructed along major transportation corridors but can also be located outside of rights-of-way. These routes are designed to permit two-way traffic using an impervious surface material such as asphalt or concrete. Width and Clearance The preferred tread minimum width is 12 feet wide but can be decreased to 10 feet in interior subdivision settings. All paths should have a 1-foot gravel shoulder and 2-foot minimum total shoulder graded away from tread at a 2% maximum slope. A minimum vertical clearance of 10 feet should be provided. Branches that could reduce clearance when weighted with snow or rain should also be removed. Grade The maximum tread cross slope shall be 2%, sloping one direction, not crowned. The cross slopes on corners and curves shall be towards the inside where drainage permits. The maximum tread cross slope should be 5%, the cross slopes on corners and curves shall be towards the inside where drainage permits. If there is a segment that has a cross slope of more than 5%, the segment should be as short as possible. Maximum grade segments: • 8.3% for a maximum of 15.24m (50ft) • 10% for a maximum of 9.14m (30ft) • 12.5% for a maximum of 3.05m (10ft) Near the top and bottom of the maximum grade segments, the grade should transition to less than 5%. Rest intervals should be provided within 7.6m (25ft) of the max grade segment. There can be no abrupt change in surface level greater than ½ inch. Anchor Routes & Shared Use Paths 709 Typical Assets and Design Considerations Cross Section Concrete - The tread base shall consist of a minimum of 3 inches of crushed gravel compacted to 95 percent of maximum density as determined by AASHTO T99. Concrete shall be a minimum of 6 inches of M4000. Asphalt -Excavate 11.5 inches of material. Install a minimum of 9 inches of crushed gravel compacted to 95 percent of maximum density as determined by AASHTO T99, unless otherwise dictated by sub-soil type materials being compacted to road standard. The overlay shall consist of 2.5 inches of asphalt compacted to 93 percent of maximum density, as determined by ASTMD 2041. Construction seal shall be applied at 0.08 gallon/square yard after installation. Material To decrease long term maintenance, tread surface must predominately be impervious material such as asphalt, concrete, pavers set on concrete, or wood decking. Porous surfaces (permeable pavers, porous asphalt, porous rubber) should be a priority in sensitive areas. The tread material including any base course will have a total minimum thickness of 6 inches. Wood deck planks must be run perpendicular to the direction of travel and joints must not exceed 36 inches. Planks must be securely fastened so they do not warp. VARIESSHARED ROAD VARIESSHARED ROAD5’LANDSCAPEAREA 5’LANDSCAPEAREA 5’SIDEWALK 5’SIDEWALK2’2’ CURB &GUTTER CURB &GUTTER BIKE BOULEVARD 12’PATHWAY Anchor Route VARIESLANDSCAPE AREA VARIESLANDSCAPE AREAVARIESWATER 4’-6’TRAIL Neighborhood Trail VARIESLANDSCAPE AREA VARIESLANDSCAPE AREA 6’-8’TRAIL Connector Path10’CLEAR BUFFER 2’VARIESLANDSCAPE AREA VARIESLANDSCAPEAREA BUFFER 2’ Shared Use Pathway 10’PAVED TRAIL VARIESTRAIL BUFFER2’2’10’ DRIVE LANE 12’CLEAR BUFFERBUFFER CURB &GUTTER VARIES SHARED ROAD VARIES SHARED ROAD 5’ LANDSCAPEAREA 5’ LANDSCAPEAREA 5’ SIDEWALK 5’ SIDEWALK 2’2’ CURB &GUTTER CURB &GUTTER BIKE BOULEVARD 12’PATHWAY Anchor Route VARIESLANDSCAPE AREA VARIESLANDSCAPE AREAVARIESWATER 4’-6’TRAIL Neighborhood Trail VARIESLANDSCAPE AREA VARIESLANDSCAPE AREA 6’-8’ TRAIL Connector Path 10’CLEAR BUFFER 2’VARIESLANDSCAPEAREA VARIESLANDSCAPEAREA BUFFER 2’ Shared Use Pathway 10’ PAVED TRAIL VARIES TRAIL BUFFER 2’2’10’DRIVE LANE 12’CLEAR BUFFERBUFFER CURB &GUTTER 710 Bike Boulevards Bike boulevards are an integrated part of the street network. Streets designated as bike boulevards should adhere to standards within the Transportation Master Plan and other adopted documents. In addition to those standards, bike boulevards should include at least one element from each of the following categories: Signs and Pavement Markings Identification signage Sharrow pavement markings Wayfinding signage Speed management tools: Speed humps, bumps, tables and cushions Chicanes Neighborhood traffic circles Median islands curb bulb outs pinch points Volume management tools: Regulatory signage Partial physical closure Full physical closure Channelized right in/right out Diagonal or median diverter Crossings: Crossing signage Pedestrian signals (Rapid flash beacons, HAWK signals) Median refuge islands curb bulb outs 711 Typical Assets and Design Considerations VARIES SHARED ROAD VARIES SHARED ROAD 5’ LANDSCAPEAREA 5’ LANDSCAPEAREA 5’ SIDEWALK 5’ SIDEWALK 2’2’ CURB &GUTTER CURB &GUTTER BIKE BOULEVARD 4’-6’TRAILNeighborhood TrailVARIESLANDSCAPE AREA VARIESLANDSCAPE AREA6’-8’TRAILConnector Path10’CLEAR BUFFER 2’VARIESLANDSCAPEAREAVARIESLANDSCAPEAREA BUFFER 2’Shared Use Pathway10’PAVED TRAILVARIESTRAIL BUFFER2’2’10’DRIVE LANE12’CLEAR BUFFERBUFFERCURB &GUTTER 712 Connector Paths These paths receive moderate use intended for a variety non-motorized, recreational, and commuter users. These paths connect meaningful destinations, such as neighborhoods, schools, and hubs of commercial activity. Connector paths are constructed with an ADA accessible surface of natural fines, or pontentially pavement, and are 6 to 8 feet in width. For paved connector paths the Class 1 standards shall be utilized. Even if paved, connector paths are not expected to be maintained during the winter. However, if the route provides important community connections, year round maintenance should be provided. For natural surface connector paths apply the standards below. Width and Clearance Single surfaced tread with a minimum width of six feet. Tread width may be reduced to 36 inches for a maximum distance of 30 feet to pass or preserve significant features such as rock formations, important vegetation, or cross watercourses. Signs should be used to warn about such constrictions. The minimum cleared zone will be the tread width plus 2 feet to either side of the tread and 10 feet vertical. In no instance may the overhead clear height be less than 8 feet. Grade A cross-slope of no less than 2 percent and no more than 5 percent to provide for water drainage is allowed. Maximum sustained running grade is 8%. A 10% maximum grade is allowed for a maximum distance of 30 feet, and a 14% maximum grade is allowed when resting intervals are provided every 5 feet. Tread will be raised above the adjacent surfaces and have a 4-inch crown. Where this requirement is not possible the tread will have a 1:20 cross slope and/or side ditches outside the cleared zone. Changes in level: • Should not exceed 51mm (2 in) • May be up to a maximum of 76mm (3 in) in areas where 51mm cannot be attained and the slope of the trail is less than 5% in any direction. • Obstacles over 51mm (2 in) in height should be removed Stream crossings will be over culverts or bridges. Only dips or slot-entrance drainpipe will be used for cross tread water stops for natural surface treads. 713 Typical Assets and Design Considerations Cross Section The path bed must be excavated 6 inches deep, prior to installation of tread mix. Tread mix shall be installed in two parts. The first 3-inch lift shall be of ¾ inch Road mix, compacted to 95%, and then 3/8th inch minus gravel (natural fines) compacted to 95%. If moisture content is not adequate for compaction, water should be added prior to rolling and compacting. Natural fines used for these paths shall consist of 80 percent sand, 10 percent silt and 10 percent clay. If the natural fines tread mix does not contain enough clay or soil binder, additional binder must be mixed in. Geo-textile material will be placed beneath and gravel or particulate tread material in poorly drained, boggy, or marshy areas, or wet meadows and on any of the following soil types: clays, clayey loams, silts, silty. The preferred material is non- woven needle-punched engineering geo-fabric, but woven is acceptable. Fabric should be selected for use and durability. Material Commuter paths shall be designed for ADA access and year-round maintenance. Those that are not paved will be surfaced with a minimum of wood decking, natural fines, or with a well maintained compacted crushed gravel. VARIES SHARED ROAD VARIES SHARED ROAD 5’ LANDSCAPE AREA 5’ LANDSCAPE AREA 5’ SIDEWALK 5’ SIDEWALK 2’2’ CURB &GUTTER CURB &GUTTER BIKE BOULEVARD 4’-6’ TRAIL Neighborhood Trail VARIES LANDSCAPE AREA VARIES LANDSCAPE AREA 6’-8’ TRAIL Connector Path 10’ CLEAR BUFFER 2’VARIES LANDSCAPE AREA VARIES LANDSCAPE AREA BUFFER 2’ Shared Use Pathway 10’ PAVED TRAIL VARIES TRAIL BUFFER 2’2’10’ DRIVE LANE 12’CLEAR BUFFERBUFFERCURB &GUTTER 714 Neighborhood Trails Neighborhood trails are narrower soft surface trails that connect locally to parks and open space These trails receive moderate to low use and are typically 3-5 feet in width. They are either natural trails developed by use over time or constructed with natural fines. ADA accessibility may be limited as trails typically follow the natural contours, however nearby sidewalk spurs can provide ADA connections to areas along the corridor. Width and Clearance Tread width minimum is three feet. The minimum clear zone will be the tread width horizontally and seven feet vertically. Grade Grades typically follow the natural topography therefore ADA access is extremely limited. Blending the trail into the setting is emphasized in trail routing. Provide positive drainage for the tread utilizing grade dips, cross sloping, and water bars to minimize erosion. Cross Section No trail bed excavation is required except to eliminate extreme cross grades. Material Preparation varies from machine-worked surfaces to those worn only by usage. No surfacing is required except in erosion prone poorly drained, marshy areas, or wet meadows. Wood chip tread materials are acceptable when traffic is limited to pedestrian traffic in sensitive locations such as in wetland nature education areas. 715 Typical Assets and Design Considerations VARIES SHARED ROAD VARIES SHARED ROAD 5’ LANDSCAPE AREA 5’ LANDSCAPE AREA 5’ SIDEWALK 5’ SIDEWALK 2’2’ CURB &GUTTER CURB &GUTTER BIKE BOULEVARD 4’-6’TRAIL Neighborhood Trail VARIESLANDSCAPE AREA VARIESLANDSCAPE AREA 6’-8’TRAIL Connector Path 10’CLEAR BUFFER 2’VARIESLANDSCAPEAREA VARIESLANDSCAPEAREA BUFFER 2’ Shared Use Pathway 10’PAVED TRAILVARIESTRAIL BUFFER2’2’10’DRIVE LANE 12’CLEAR BUFFERBUFFERCURB &GUTTER 716 Maintaining active transportation routes that are safe and accessible for users of all ages and abilities is a high priority. In addition, adequate maintenance is critical to maximizing year-round utilization. The City needs to establish annual and long-term maintenance plans that includes a deferred maintenance analysis. There are three essential elements to properly maintaining an active transportation network. First, establish minimum standards for maintenance. Next, determine maintenance responsibility for each segment of the network. Lastly, identify the various sources to finance the necessary maintenance. Methods Developing a comprehensive maintenance strategy will require considering various surface types, locations, responsible parties, and available funding. Anchor Routes and Shared Use Paths Share use paths located within street rights-of-way are typically maintained by the corresponding jurisdiction. One challenge is achieving consistent maintenance expectations and standards between the City, County, and State. Connector Paths The maintenance of Connectors not only depends on the responsible party but also on the surface type each route. Neighborhood Trails Despite being smaller, trails require a considerable amount of maintenance depending on location, the quality of construction, and the amount of use. Neighborhood trails are typically maintained by neighborhood associations, HOAs, the City, or GVLT. AT Maintenance 717 Regulations The ability of the City to regulate maintenance of active transportation routes is limited. The City should consider ways to require routes owned or managed by private parties to be maintained according to established standards. The following actions are recommended. • Strengthen requirements for residential subdivisions, commercial developments, and other privately held routes to be adequately maintained according to standards adopted by the City. Policies Maintenance of active transportation routes in Bozeman is currently managed through a variety of resources, including private property owners, homeowner associations, community groups, non-profit partners, the City, and the Montana Department of Transportation. Clarifying responsibilities for maintenance and establishing standards will help ensure the financial investment developing a complete network is protected and enhanced in future years. The following actions are recommended. • Establish a comprehensive maintenance plan that includes minimum standards for upkeep, repairs, and replacement • Conduct a comprehensive deferred maintenance analysis of each route identifying the current condition, upkeep and repair needs, and sections needing to be rebuilt • Establish a maintenance template for the City, property owners, and partners to develop schedule tasks and estimate costs • Review and clarify how the Bozeman Parks Maintenance District can support the maintenance of the network Maintenance Standards General maintenance standards for evaluating needs for surface care, repairs, safety precautions, and managing adjacent landscaping should be developed for and consistently applied to all network typologies. In addition to annual and long- term tasks, seasonal maintenance of shared use paths is essential to accommodating year-round active transportation. Paved paths must have the snow removed frequently during the winter and be swept of grit and debris each spring. Maintenance Actions The following actions are recommended. • Develop a comprehensive maintenance plan including detailed standards by typology that ensure a high-level of safety, accessibility, and utilization. Below are recommended routine and periodic maintenance tasks based on surface type. Paved Surfaces—Routine maintenance activities: • Regular sweeping to remove debris, gravel, and other hazardous items • Regular snow removal during winter months • Inspect and repair pavement surface problems (seal cracks, grind down ridges, cut back tree roots, repair pavement) • Prune adjacent and overhanging vegetation to reduce encroachment or cause sight distance problems • Treating noxious weeds along corridor • Mowing trail edges if applicable (keep vegetation height low along trail) • Clearing drainage features to ensure proper function Paved Surfaces—Periodic maintenance activities: • Coordinate and schedule pavement overlays as part of adjacent road maintenance • Addition of surfacing material depending on condition (2-3 years) 718 • Re-grading to improve cross-slope or out-slope for improved drainage • Improvement of transitions with sidewalks or streets, restripe crosswalks and other markers • Repair or replace wayfinding, stop control signs and other elements • Restripe crosswalks and other markers Natural Surfaces—Routine maintenance activities: • Removing encroaching vegetation from trail tread (grading, chemical treatment) • Prune adjacent and overhanging vegetation to reduce encroachment or cause sight distance problems • Treating noxious weeds along corridor • Mowing trail edges if applicable (keep vegetation height low along trail) • Clearing drainage features to ensure proper function • Flood or rain damage repair: silt clean up, culvert clean out, etc. • Bridge/culvert inspection, clearing and repair • Map/signage post condition inspection, and vandalism repair • Assessing need for sign/map updates or replacement Natural Surfaces—Periodic maintenance activities: • Yearly trail evaluation to determine the need for minor repairs, identification of erosion damage, need for improved drainage • Addition of surfacing material depending on condition (2-3 years) • Re-grading to improve cross-slope or out-slope for improved drainage • Improvement of transitions with sidewalks or streets, restripe crosswalks and other markers • Repair or replace wayfinding, stop control signs and other elements • Restripe crosswalks and other markers Funding Like construction, the maintenance of Bozeman’s active transportation is funded by a variety of entities including the City, Montana Department of Transportation, non-profit partners, and private property owners. There are more maintenance needs than committed funding which leads to a backlog of repairs and overall degradation of accessibility and utilization. According to the Rails to Trail Conservancy, annual maintenance costs on average range from $1,000 to $2,000 per trail mile, depending upon the surface. Therefore, average annual funding required to maintain Bozeman’s 178 miles of paths and trails is approximately $267,000. The funding needed to adequately maintain the network will only increase as new extensions and routes are constructed. To meet this financial commitment, the City and its partners must proactively account for the necessary funding to execute the annual and long-term maintenance plans and aggressively commit the dollars. The following actions are recommended. • Ensure that a significant portion of the Parks and Trails Maintenance District funds are dedicated to path and trail maintenance • Allocate an annual portion of the City’s street maintenance budget to repair shared use paths and paved connector paths • Include Bozeman’s active transportation network and plan into the future Metropolitan Planning Organization budget Prioritization Addressing the maintenance backlog of existing active transportation network will take years and considerable funding. Therefore, it is important to develop and utilize a method to prioritize the needed upkeep and repair projects. This plan includes a weighted prioritization matrix template utilizing the criteria listed below. The following actions are recommended. Develop a methodology for prioritizing potential 719 maintenance projects based on the following criteria: • Area of deferred maintenance that poses a public safety risk • Area of deferred maintenance that restricts equitable access • Area of deferred maintenance that reduces utilization • Highly utilized routes • Ability to partner and/or leverage creative funding opportunities 720 Memorandum REPORT TO:City Commission FROM:Chris Saunders, Community Development Manager Erin George, Community Development Assistant Director Anna Bentley, Community Development Director SUBJECT:UDC Project - Review and Advise Regarding the Update to the Unified Development Code, Chapter 38, Bozeman Municipal Code to Address Potential Changes to Standards Relating to Zoning District and Building Transitions; and Commercial and Mixed-Use Zoning Districts, Application 21381 MEETING DATE:February 14, 2023 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Policy Discussion RECOMMENDATION:Receive presentation, discuss proposed alternatives, and provide direction to staff and consultants. STRATEGIC PLAN:4.1 Informed Conversation on Growth: Continue developing an in-depth understanding of how Bozeman is growing and changing and proactively address change in a balanced and coordinated manner. BACKGROUND:On December 21, 2021, the City Commission adopted Resolution 5368. The resolution established priorities for municipal actions over the next two years. Priorities include adopting changes to the Unified Development Code to “facilitate increased housing density, housing affordability, climate action plan objectives, sustainable building practices, and a transparent, predictable and understandable development review process.” This agenda item is part of the UDC update process and is a work session regarding how higher and lower density developments can successfully be adjacent. Discussion will also include possible changes to or deletions of commercial and mixed-use zoning district. A memo providing background material is attached. Consultants will present information to the City Commission and receive direction and input. The input will then be used to prepare draft materials for further public review and input. Ongoing information about the UDC project can be found on at the engage.bozeman.net website, the official portal for the project. Comments and input can also be submitted through engage.bozeman.net and summaries of prior City Commission and other meetings are provided including presentation materials. Included with this agenda item are 721 summaries of several engagement tools and outcomes from the project so far. Additional meetings and other options for engagement will be provided as the project moves forward. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:Commission will give direction on degree to pursue specific issues relating to zoning district and building transitions; and commercial and mixed-use zoning districts. ALTERNATIVES:As identified by the City Commission FISCAL EFFECTS:Funds for this work are budgeted and appropriated. Attachments: 2-14-2023 Work Session cover memo .pdf Group Engagement Log 2-07-2023.pdf Tall Buildings Map 7-15-2022 small.pdf 230208_Midway Report, Engagement Station DRAFT.pdf Report compiled on: February 6, 2023 722 City Commission Zoning District and Building Transitions and Commercial and Mixed-Use Districts Work Session Background Materials Overall Project Background: On December 21, 2021, the City Commission adopted Resolution 5368. The resolution established priorities for the next two years. Priorities include adopting changes to the Unified Development Code to “facilitate increased housing density, housing affordability, climate action plan objectives, sustainable building practices, and a transparent, predictable and understandable development review process.” The UDC revision process (“the UDC Project”) focuses on implementing policy established by adopted plans including Bozeman Community Plan 2020, Climate Action Plan, Community Housing Action Plan, and the in-progress Parks, Recreation, and Active Transportation. The UDC project is focused on specific improvements, with direction to be completed by December 2023. Objectives for the UDC revision project are: • Implementation of growth policy, climate action plan, housing action plan, and other adopted city plans. • Improving readability and usability of the code for infrequent users while maintaining legal soundness. • Update and revisions to zoning district descriptions and options consistent with the growth policy. • Improve graphics to improve clarity and understanding of standards. Work Session General Policy Background: This work session is to assess potential changes to how the City’s regulations address adjacency of zoning districts of differing intensities. Zoning districts often are distinguished in part by differences in building heights and massing of buildings. The City strives to place zoning boundaries along streets and similar physical separators that provide an inherent softening of the differences between districts. However, zoning decisions made in the past do include zoning district boundaries along alleys and property lines with less built in separation. As the community has continued to grow and land prices have increased there has been a greater degree of building up. An allowance for taller buildings in some districts has existed for many years and is only now being used. This evolution in the built environment has called attention to the issue of mass and scale transitions and considerable public comment has been received in association with individual projects. The City has adopted over the years a range of zoning districts to meet different needs. Districts created over the past 15 years have focused on allowing greater mixing of uses; relying more on development standards on form and performance rather than uses to address issues of development. It is appropriate to evaluate the palette of commercial and mixed-use districts and determine which should be continued, which amended, and which deleted. Excessive 723 numbers of districts with only minor differences add complexity without compensating benefits. Both of the issues for discussion this evening are a continuation of the City’s evolution to a more form-based rather than dominantly use-based zoning code. This process has been under way since adoption of the 2009 growth policy which called for evaluation and implementation of form-based zoning. Growth Policy: The City adopted a new growth policy, the Bozeman Community Plan 2020, in November 2020. State law requires zoning ordinances to be "in accord" with the growth policy. The Bozeman Community Plan 2020 includes direction to amend land development regulations. The City also recently adopted plans for climate action and housing, and an update to the parks plan is underway. Land use regulations play a role in implementing those plans as well. The updated growth policy and related plans establish the policy direction for amendments to be implemented with these code updates. The UDC project allows the City to put the tools in place to take action on adopted policy. This work is not intended to create new policy or change the policy direction already established. Example of Bozeman Community Plan 2020 policy direction influencing this work session on zoning districts include: R-1.7 Be flexible: willingness and ability to adopt alternative strategies in response to changing circumstances. DCD-1.2 Remove regulatory barriers to infill. DCD-2.2 Support higher density development along main corridors and at high visibility street corners to accommodate population growth and support businesses. DCD-2.3 Review and update minimum development intensity requirements in residential and nonresidential zoning districts. DCD-2.4 Evaluate revisions to maximum building height limits in all zoning districts to account for contemporary building methods and building code changes. DCD-2.8 Revise the zoning ordinance, reducing the number of zoning districts to be more consistent with the designated land use classifications, to simplify the development process, and support affordability objectives of the plan. DCD-2.9 Evaluate increasing the number of stories allowed in centers of employment and activity while also directing height transitions down to adjacent neighborhoods. 724 DCD-3.5 Encourage increased development intensity in commercial centers and near major employers. DCD-4.3 Complete the transition to a form-based code and simplification so that it can be understood by the general public and consistently applied by planning staff. M-1.1 Prioritize mixed-use land use patterns. Encourage and enable the development of housing, jobs, and services in close proximity to one another. EE-2.2 Review and revise, or possibly replace, the Business Park Mixed Use zoning district to include urban standards and consider possible alterations to the allowed uses. RC-4.4 Update the Unified Development Code (UDC) to: • Implement a twice-yearly code revision cycle. Identify and make revisions to optimize the UDC current conditions. • Incorporate development minimums in designated growth areas. • Revise the zoning map to harmonize with the future land use map. Work Session Topics: Based on a review of the various policy documents and their extensive professional experience, the Code Studio team proposes two items for Commission consideration. None of the suggestions are finalized and all will be further developed prior to incorporation as part of the overall code update draft. 1. Method of approach for transitions between zoning districts. 2. Consolidation, amendment, or deletion of non-residential zoning districts. Background Information on Topics: 1. Tall buildings have been a noticeable element of building in Bozeman for a very long time. See the attached map of tall buildings prepared in July 2022, showing location, size, and height throughout the community. Four plus story buildings have been a feature of Bozeman since the 1800’s. Although the tallest buildings have clustered around Downtown and Montana State University buildings of considerable height are located throughout the community. For many years the full allowance of development was infrequently used. That is changing as land prices increase and construction methods improve. The City policy for development has for many years encouraged infill development which has supported taller buildings within existing developed areas. In 2018, in response to the evolving community, the City Commission adopted specific standards to address the mass and scale of buildings at the edges of zoning districts. These are in Section 38.32.060. The existing standards specify when the transition applies based on the adjacency of certain districts. Not all districts are subject to the transition standard. The standard is specific to only the immediate edge of a zone and does not apply to buildings on the 725 geographic interior of a zoning district. The primary focus of the transition standard is a requirement to taper the height of a building away from the zoning district with smaller allowed heights. No transition is required if the district boundary is a street. DCD-2.9 of the Bozeman Community Plan 2020 directs evaluation of heights and transitions as part of consideration of height changes. Code Studio will present some alternatives to provide a more refined approach addressing a broader range of circumstances and transition methods. The Commission will be asked to give direction on which methods to further pursue and the scope of applicability for the standard. 2. The City has twelve non-residential and mixed use zoning districts to meet different requirements of the community. The uses allowed in the various districts are in Division 38.310 and the form and intensity standards such as heights and setbacks are in Division 38.320. Some districts were created decades ago and others are recently created. As described above, the Bozeman Community Plan 2020 suggests evaluation and possible revision of zoning districts as part of the implementation of the plan. There is a need to evaluate whether the existing districts are still meeting community needs and whether some should be deleted, consolidated, or updated. The migration of the City’s land development regulations to be more form-based instead of use-based as called for in DCD-4.3 supports a focus on transitions between districts as well as the actual districts. The potential changes to districts would likely result in changes to the zoning map to reflect the change in the number and types of districts. Code Studio will present alternatives for possible changes to individual districts. The Commission will be asked to give direction on what general changes will be made to specific districts. More refined amendments will then be identified and prepared for consideration by the community as part of the code adoption process. Work Session Schedule: The magnitude of the anticipated changes necessitates periodic input from the Commission and public to ensure the project remains on course and timely. A series of focused work sessions are proposed at critical junctures in the process to gather information and confirm project direction. Each work session will focus on one element of policy implementation. The sequence of subjects will correlate and coordinate with ongoing work, with the added goal of identifying key elements early in the process and working efficiently. City Commission work sessions are below; dates are provided for those already in the Commission’s six-month schedule. Tuesday, September 13th – Organization and Page Layout (completed) Tuesday, October 18th – Residential Zoning Districts (completed) Tuesday, November 15th – Sustainability (completed) Tuesday, February 14th – Transitions between districts and Commercial Zoning Districts Tuesday, February 28th – Parking Tuesday, March 7th – Transportation 726 Ongoing summaries of work sessions and other public engagement and information about the project is available at engage.bozeman.net/UDC. A report on the intercept outreach program and a report of other outreach to date is attached to this item. Public Engagement: The City used a variety of techniques to engage the public during the code update process. A detailed report on the intercept technique is attached to this agenda item. A summary of various meetings and other engagement so far is also attached. Outreach and engagement will continue as the project moves forward. The primary outreach tool, consistent with the adopted communication plan for this work, is engage.bozeman.net. 727 Group Engagement Events (chronological) 8/11/2022 Engage Bozeman website for project goes live Website provides summary of actions, engagement opportunities and outcomes, tool for comment submittal, and other functions continuously throughout the project. 9/12/2022 Stakeholder Meeting #1 (Designers) Attendees: • Chris Budeski - Madison Engineering • Doug Minarik - Minarik Architecture • Marty Matsen - Fall Creek Planning (Former Director) • Rob Pertzborn - Intrinsik Architecture • Chris Nauman - Sanderson Stewart • Cordell Poole - Stahly Engineering • Brian Caldwell - ThinkTank Design • Mark Egge - FBC guy 9/12/2023 Community Development Board Work Session Discussion of project overall approach, outreach, formatting 9/13/2022 Stakeholder Meeting #2 (Producers) Attendees • Mike Magrans - Outlaw Development • Someone else from Outlaw Development (didn't catch name) • Grant Syth - Bridger Builders • Andrew Gault - Home Base Partners • Brian Klein - Providence Development • Parker Lange - Providence Development • Greg Allen - Cadius Partners • Jason Leep - Williams Homes (see WHA land planners) 9/13/2022 City Commission Work Session Meeting minutes – Formatting and layout recommendations and direction 10/13/2022 Inter-Neighborhood Council Attendees not listed. 728 10/17/2022 NENA Meeting Attendees • Linda Semones – Bogert park resident • Amy Kelley Hoitsma – former NA president; Peach Street • Sarah Rosenberg – preservation planner at City of Bozeman • Cathy Costakis – former planning board member • Karen Flipovich – student liaison on character report, lives on N Grand • Suzanne Held – NENA member • Sarah Church – prof of land use planning at MSU • Susanne Cowan – prof at MSU, worked on report, architectural history 10/18/2022 Design Professionals call (with City staff) 42 Persons attended 10/18/2022 City Commission Work Session Meeting minutes – Residential districts recommendations and direction 10/24/2022 Intercept Activities by Interboro In person outreach at sites across the City. See separate report for outcomes. Work is ongoing. 10/27/2022 Code Connect Public e-meeting to present summary of Commission direction on residential districts and have public question and answer. 11/7/2022 Community Development Board Presentation on work done to date. 11/15/2022 City Commission Work Session Meeting minutes – Sustainability recommendations and direction 729 11/21/2022 Community Development Board Presentation on work done to date. 11/30/2022 MSU Stakeholder Engagement Course (Prof. Sarah Church) Dani conducted intercept activity and presented on project outreach efforts with MSU students. 12/1/2022 Code Connect Public e-meeting to present summary of Commission direction on sustainability and have public question and answer. 12/14/2022 Sustainability Board Meeting Discussion of Commission direction on sustainability, EV charging, and urban agriculture 1/9/2023 Community Development Board Work Session Residential Districts recommendations, direction from Commission, and further refinement. 1/30/2023 Northwestern Energy Stakeholder Meeting Discussion on adequacy of existing standards, requirements for service and meters and how to address, EV impacts on site design 2/1/2023 Economic Development Board Work Session Possible changes to parking requirements 730 731 Produced by:INTERBORO Produced for: Building Our Future TogetherMidway Project Report on theMobile Engagement StationDRAFT 732 II IIIINTERBORO City of Bozeman StaffAnna Bentley, Director of Community DevelopmentErin George, Deputy Director of Community Development Chris Saunders, Community Development ManagerDani Hess, Community Engagement Coordinator Kelley Rischke, Assistant City Attorney Natalie Meyer, Sustainability Program ManagerTom Rogers, Senior Planner Interboro PartnersDan D’Oca, PrincipalCaleb Mitchell, PlannerRebecca Hennings, Engagement CoordinatorDaisy Parnell, Engagement Street TeamLacey Peterson, Engagement Street TeamKrista Hunton-Lange, Engagement Street Team Jenavieve Lynch, Engagement Street Team Code StudioColin Scarff, PrincipalRyan Johnson, AssociateKelsey Morrow, Senior Associate Logan SimpsonJennifer Gardner, Senior AssociateJoe Moss, Planner Sophia Frankenburg, Planner Acknowledgements DRAFT733 IV VINTERBORO Table of Contents Overview 6 Building Our Future TogetherTeamEngagement Role Engagement Strategy 8 About the BrochuresBrochure AnatomyAbout the StationSummary of EventsAbout the Online Station Engagement Findings 20 By the NumbersFindings per KeywordCommon Topics DiscussedSpatial Recommendations Next Steps 36 DRAFT734 6 7INTERBORO Engagement Role Updates to the Unified Development Code affect every member of the Bozeman community. Over time revisions to the UDC shape the city through setting the parameters for all future development. Given how these modernizations significantly govern Bozeman’s built environment, it is important to collect robust community input on these technical but decisive adjustments to city code. The latest round of changes to the UDC respond directly to a number of guiding documents which outline the City of Bozeman’s vision and goals for future development. These include the Bozeman Community Plan 2020 (growth policy), the Climate Plan, as well as a number of strategic priorities such as affordable housing and equity. Given these already articulated goals, the intention of our public outreach was not to ask people what they wanted abstractly from the UDC update, but rather how they wanted certain ambitions for the future of Bozeman to be concretely codified. In asking this question of how, our aim for the outreach activity was to make it as fun and engaging as possible. Team Interboro Partners is an award-winning, multi- disciplinary design firm that offers inventive and inclusive planning, design, and community outreach. Their work is founded on good listening, keen observation, and productive community engagement. They use a participatory, place-specific approach to create consensus around complex projects ranging from buildings, parks, and open spaces to neighborhood, city, and regional plans. They work closely with clients and communities to creatively program, design, and realize beautiful, inclusive environments that are inviting to everyone. Interboro is based in Brooklyn, Detroit, and Boston, and work nationally and internationally. Code Studio pursues planning and implementation work that yields vibrant, mixed use, walkable communities through creative urban infill, incremental redevelopment and transformational change. Founded in 2006, the firm is nationally renowned for its highly visual page layout, simple graphics and easily understood and enforced text. The firm works across the United States completing combined plan and code projects, as well as working on codes in places planned and designed by others. Code Studio’s approach focuses on translating planning and design concepts into regulatory language to create the physical “place” envisioned by a community. Logan Simpson has passionately provided a wide range of environmental, landscape architecture, and planning services for many projects throughout the West for more than a quarter of a century. Their staff’s exceptional capabilities and expertise is the foundation of their ability to provide high-quality service to our clients. Building Our Future Together The city of Bozeman seeks to implement its recently adopted Bozeman Community Plan 2020 (growth policy) and other supporting specific topic plans in its most recent updates of the Unifed Development Code. These plans include the Climate Plan and the city’s goals around housing supply and affordability. The land use regulations in the UDC include zoning districts, subdivision review procedures, park and transportation standards, and other generally applicable land development standards. Updates to the standards and regulations in the UDC will help bring alignment with the community’s goals established in our guiding plans and policies. Overview DRAFT735 8 9INTERBORO Topic Goal Category Recommendation accessory dwelling units densifying zoning districts Promote development of accessory dwelling units (ADUs) beltway / greenway connecting transportation Identify possible routes for future bicycle and pedestrian beltway/greenway. bicycle infrastructure connecting sustainability Prioritize and construct key bicycle infrastructure, to include wayfinding signage, connections, and enhance- ments. bus shelters connecting transportation Establish standards and procedures for placement of bus shelters in City rights of way. corner-oriented development densifying zoning districts Evaluate alternatives for more intensive development in proximity to high visibility corners, services, and parks. corridor-oriented development densifying zoning districts Support higher density development along main corridors. employment-oriented design densifying zoning districts Encourage increased development intensity in commercial centers and near major employers. environmentally sensitive areas preserving sustainability Work with partner organizations to identify and reduce impacts on at-risk, environmentally sensitive areas. floodplain regulations preserving sustainability Update floodplain and other regulations that protect the environment. height limits densifying zoning districts Evaluate revisions to maximum building height limits in all zoning districts. housing diversity diversifying zoning districts Promote housing diversity, including missing middle housing. linear parks connecting park standards Coordinate the location of existing and future parks to create opportunities for linear parks to connect parks. minimum density densifying zoning districts Increase required minimum densities in residential districts. mixed-use development diversifying zoning districts Prioritize mixed-use land use patterns. multimodal accessibility connecting transportation Expand multimodal accessibility between districts and throughout the City. neighborhood-scale commercial diversifying zoning districts Identify and zone appropriate locations for neighborhood-scale commercial development. open space standards regulating park standards Review and update landscape and open space standardss to reduce water use. park programs programing park standards Incorporate unique and inclusive recreational and artistic elements into parks. parking requirements densifying parking Evaluate parking requirements and methods of providing parking for and between districts. planning for climate change regulating sustainability Integrate climate change considerations into development standards. safe crossings connecting transportation Develop safe crossings along priority and high utilization pedestrian and biking corridors. school-oriented development densifying zoning districts Revise the zoning map to support higher intensity residential districts near schools, services, and transportation. single-family housing densifying zoning districts Revise the zoning map to lessen areas exclusively zoned for single-type housing. small lot sizes densifying zoning districts Support compact neighborhoods, small lot sizes, and small floor plans. solar power generation regulating sustainability Revise block and lot design standards, including orientation for solar power generation throughout city. transportation network connecting transportation Develop safe, connected, and complementary transportation networks trunk network connecting transportation Develop a trunk network of high-frequency, priority transit service connecting major commercial nodes urban agriculture programing sustainability Encourage urban agriculture as part of focal point, in close proximity to schools, and near dense housing. About the Brochures The strategic direction of our public outreach required the specific explanation of certain urban development topics, as well as targeted questions that responded directly to Bozeman’s proposed objectives. We developed the methodology of the mass-distributed informative brochure as a way to first: educate the public on a range of technical development subjects, second: garner informed, thoughtful, and critical responses from many members of the Bozeman community, and third: collect this information in an informal, colorful, and enjoyable way. In devising the list of topics for the brochure activity we combed through the Bozeman Community Plan 2020 (growth policy) to identify a set of keywords. We then tagged these selected keywords in a variety of ways including by topic (ex. planning, zoning, sustainability, ect.), by area (transportation, housing, commercial, ect.), or by goal (connecting, preserving, densifying, ect.). Engagement Strategy DRAFT736 10 11INTERBORO Brochure Anatomy Conceived as a unified series, the layout of these brochures is organized with a standardized format. The cover page prominently displays the keyword title on the top left hand corner within a uniform color block designating the particular “area” categorization the topic belongs to. As one opens the brochure, the initial page spread introduces the topic with a simple definition and diagram. This is followed by some precedent images from Bozeman or in other comparable urban contexts. Relevant goals of the Bozeman Community Plan 2020 (growth policy) are stated along with an explanation contextualizing the recommendation. These brochures also include precedents of relevant code language from other cities in comparison to that of Bozeman’s. On the back cover, the “area” categorization is marked (park standards, parking, sustainability, transportation, or zoning districts) as well as a self addressed return mailing address to City Hall.DRAFT737 12 13INTERBORODRAFT738 14 15INTERBORO BROCHURESThese informational brochures explain a range of urban development topics and ask people their thoughts on specific relevent issues. MAPThis map of Bozeman serves as a reference tool for the brochures as well as for conversation. COMMUNITY PLANThis printed out copy of the Bozeman Community Plan serves as a reference tool and as a way to explain the larger intention of the project. SIGNThis sign is used to attract pass-ers-by and to contextualize the entire engagement station. TOPIC MENUThis Topic “Menu” offers a lowstakes and casual way for passers-by to choose a topic that interests them as a way to start the conversation. About the Station To conduct our engagement activity we developed an eye-catching mobile engagement station with the ability to be easily set up and broken down for easy transportation across the city. Our station, consisting of a purpose built tabletop, brochure display stand, and annotated map of the city, was conceived to present the vocabulary of urban development in the urban context of the public market, street, or festival. So far in the project we have transported the station in various forms to ten different engagement events including school workshops, trailhead intercepts, and pop-up events between market stalls. Map of Bozeman used for Engagement Station What is thefuture ofbozeman? URBAN AGRICULTURE CORRIDOR-ORI E N T E D D E V E L O P M E N T HEIGHT LIMIT S HOUSING DIV E R SI T Y NEIGHBORHO O D- S C A L E R E T AI L SCHOOL-ORIENTED D E V E L O P M E N T ADUS MIXED-US E D E V E L O P M E N T SOLAR P A N E L S EV Charging Safe crossings Open S p a c e Urban A g r i c u l t u r e park Progra m s Tree Coverage Housing Diversity Poster used for engagement activitiesDRAFT 739 16 17INTERBORO Downtown Bozeman Intercept 10/13/22 Bozeman Fall Made Fair 10/15/22 Langohr Community Garden Intercept 10/15/22 Christmas Stroll Intercept 12/3/22 Summary of Events Inter-Neighborhood Council MeetingThursday 10/13/22City Commission Meeting Room in City Hall4:30-6:00 pm On Thursday October 13th we participated in the Inter-Neighborhood Council Meeting at the City Commission Meeting Room in City Hall. We presented the concept and plan for the community engagement intercept activity before performing the activity in small groups with members of the Inter- neighborhood council. Downtown Bozeman InterceptFriday 10/14/22Soroptomist Park on Main & Rouse Ave12:00-2:00 pm On Friday October 14th we set up the engagement station at the parklet at the intersection of Black and Babcock where we spoke with numerous passersby about a variety of brochure topics. Regional Park InterceptFriday 10/14/22Gallatin County Regional Park3:00-5:00 pm In the afternoon we went to the Gallatin County Regional Park where we heard there was historically minimal community engagement. We spent several hours at the trailhead. Bozeman Fall Made FairSaturday 10/15/22Brick Breeden Fieldhouse, MSU9:00-11:00 am On Saturday October 15th, we attended the Bozeman Fall Made Fair where we set up a booth among Montana artisans and makers. Here we had the opportunity to speak with a range of Bozeman residents about various topics and handed out numerous brochures to passersby. Langohr Community Garden InterceptSaturday 10/15/22Langhor Community Garden Trailhead 12:00-2:00 pm In the afternoon later that day we continued to Langohr Community Garden where we set up the mobile engagement station along the Nature Park Trail. We spoke with a stream of pedestrians, bikers, and dog walkers. Peets Hill/Burke Park InterceptSaturday 10/15/22Peets Hill Parking Lot3:00-500pm Finally that day we set up the engagement at the base of Peets Hill where there was a large amount of afternoon traffic with residents enjoying the outdoor weather. Winter Farmers MarketSaturday 11/19/22Gallatin County Fairgrounds9:00 am - 12:00 pm On the morning of Saturday November 19th, we set up a booth at the Winter Farmers Market at the Gallatin County Fairgrounds. Stakeholder Engagement Course - with Professor Sarah Church and students Wednesday 11/30/22 5:30-6:30 Dr. Sarah Church hosted the UDC engagement team to facilitate discussions on UDC topics and provide an opportunity for students to learn about the project and share their reflections in group discussion and by filling out pamphlets. Christmas Stroll InterceptSaturday 12/3/22Downtown Bozeman4:30-7:30 pm On December 3rd, the engagement station was installed at the Christmas Stroll in Downtown Bozeman where passersby spoke to the team about their future concerns for the shape of the city.DRAFT740 18 19INTERBORO About the Online Station In addition to our physical engagement station, we also constructed a digital version of the brochure materials. The website (https://bozeman-code.net) presents in both Spanish and English the same set of brochures in a grid to replicate the display of the physical station. After clicking on the cover page of one of the brochures, the user is directed to a new page where they can scroll through the brochure before filling out some questions at the end. DRAFT741 20 21INTERBORO 70 and up 1.1% 60 - 69 20.9% 50 - 59 4.4% 40 - 49 9.9% 30 - 39 15.4% 13 - 19 31.9% 20 - 29 16.5% urban agriculture 8.9% solar power 11.7% school-oriented 8.4% neighborhood 7.8% mixed-use 7.8% adu 9.5%corner-oriented 6.1% corridor-oriented 7.3%employment -oriented 5.0% height limits 14.5% housing diversity 12.8% development -scale retail 59718 12.3% 59715 87.7% development Responses by ZIP Responses by Age Group Responses by Topic 70 and up 1.1%60 - 69 20.9% 50 - 59 4.4% 40 - 49 9.9% 30 - 39 15.4% 13 - 19 31.9% 20 - 29 16.5% urban agriculture 8.9% solar power 11.7% school-oriented 8.4% neighborhood 7.8% mixed-use 7.8% adu 9.5%corner-oriented 6.1% corridor-oriented 7.3%employment -oriented 5.0% height limits 14.5% housing diversity 12.8% development -scale retail 59718 12.3% 59715 87.7% development Responses by ZIP Responses by Age Group Responses by Topic 17 10 15 19 14 13 13 22 25 8 11 28 1413 8 4 74 56 7 70 and up 1.1%60 - 69 20.9% 50 - 59 4.4% 40 - 49 9.9% 30 - 3915.4% 13 - 1931.9% 20 - 29 16.5% urban agriculture8.9% solar power 11.7% school-oriented 8.4% neighborhood 7.8% mixed-use 7.8% adu 9.5%corner-oriented 6.1% corridor-oriented 7.3%employment -oriented 5.0% height limits 14.5% housing diversity 12.8% development -scale retail 59718 12.3% 59715 87.7% development Responses by ZIP Responses by Age Group Responses by Topic 70 and up 1.1%60 - 69 20.9% 50 - 59 4.4% 40 - 49 9.9% 30 - 3915.4% 13 - 1931.9% 20 - 2916.5% urban agriculture 8.9% solar power 11.7% school-oriented 8.4% neighborhood 7.8% mixed-use 7.8% adu 9.5%corner-oriented 6.1% corridor-oriented 7.3%employment -oriented 5.0% height limits 14.5% housing diversity 12.8% development -scale retail 59718 12.3% 59715 87.7% development Responses by ZIP Responses by Age Group Responses by Topic 17 10 15 19 14 13 13 22 25 8 11 28 1413 8 4 74 56 7 70 and up 1.1%60 - 69 20.9% 50 - 59 4.4% 40 - 49 9.9% 30 - 3915.4% 13 - 1931.9% 20 - 29 16.5% urban agriculture 8.9% solar power 11.7% school-oriented 8.4% neighborhood 7.8% mixed-use 7.8% adu 9.5%corner-oriented 6.1% corridor-oriented 7.3%employment -oriented 5.0% height limits 14.5% housing diversity 12.8% development -scale retail 59718 12.3% 59715 87.7% development Responses by ZIP Responses by Age Group Responses by Topic 70 and up 1.1% 60 - 69 20.9% 50 - 59 4.4% 40 - 49 9.9% 30 - 39 15.4% 13 - 1931.9% 20 - 2916.5% urban agriculture 8.9% solar power 11.7% school-oriented 8.4% neighborhood 7.8% mixed-use 7.8% adu 9.5%corner-oriented 6.1% corridor-oriented 7.3%employment -oriented 5.0% height limits 14.5% housing diversity 12.8% development -scale retail 59718 12.3% 59715 87.7% development Responses by ZIP Responses by Age Group Responses by Topic 17 10 15 19 14 13 13 22 25 8 11 28 1413 8 4 74 56 7 Responses by age group: Responses by topic: Responses by ZIP code: Members of the Bozeman community across age groups provided their opinions through these brochures. Across the eleven brochures, height limits was the most popular topic and employment oriented development was the least. The majority of respondents live on the eastern side of Bozeman, whereas there were relatively few responeses from the western side of the city. Engagement Findings 250 179 3406 7 Conversations around the city Completed Brochures Intercept Sessions Focus Groups Unique Insights By the Numbers:DRAFT742 22 23INTERBORO Q1: Where would you like to see more intensive development? Around which corners, services, and parks? • 7 responses to this question• 2 respondents mentioned Pete’s Hill• 3 respondents mentioned Lindley • Southside Park, Story Mansion, “along 7th on the south side of the tracks,” Rouse and Main (and further east), 19th, 7th, Huffine, Lindley Park, and Gallatin County Regional Park were also mentioned. What people said about Corner-oriented Development: “If done well this could be an awesome way to build a neighborhood community and bridge the commercial and residential.” “Buildings on corners should be taller to highlight being an important destination but still small enough to blend in.” “I feel like buildings should not be taller than 3 stories anywhere in Bozeman, but that boat has sailed.” Q1: Have you considered adding an ADU? If not, why? Is there something the city could do to make it easier for you? • 14 responses to this question• 9 respondents either have an ADU or have considered adding one • Of the 5 respondents who don’t have on haven’t considered it, 3 cited existing restrictions as a reason. Q2: Which regulations do you think are important for ADUs in Bozeman? • 11 responses to this question• 4 respondents expressed concerns that ADUs are used primarily for short-term rentals.• 4 respondents expressed concerns about parking.• 4 respondents had recommendations for tightening existing regulations• 4 respondents had recommendations for loosening existing regulations What people said about ADUs: “I think a study should be done to determine if vacation rentals are interfering with other long term rental inventory; there should be incentives to use ADUs for long term rentals and not vacation.” “Height limitation is key; Water usage + parking on site and in neighborhood need consideration as well” “Where are people supposed to park? How is this managed in the winter with snow?” Findings per Keyword DRAFT743 24 25INTERBORO Q1: Which employment areas should have development intensity increased? • 6 responses to this question • Little consensus or overlap in answers • West side of Bozeman, industrial areas, North 19th, eastern emplyment areas, closer to downtown, central Bozeman, and the north side of the highway were all mentioned. What would you like to see in these employment areas? • Grocery stores, restaurants, parks, mixed use development, increased housing density were mentioned. • One respondent also mentioned the importance of more bikeable and walkable areas and greater proximity to workplaces. What people said about Employee-oriented Development? “Housing, employment, and services all within walking distance sounds like a great idea to me. Do it everywhere it makes sense.” “Density should be increased across town and economic centers should be equally dispersed. We aren’t that big that there should be employment deserts in this town. Parts of Bozeman are still growing at suburban density which is a very irresponsible land use pattern and reinforces inequity in access to parks and trails vs. exposure to vehicular congestion, noise and hardscape.” Q1: Where would you like to see more intensive development? Around which corridors? • 11 responses to this question• 2 respondents mentioned Oak and Durston• 2 respondents mentioned N 7th Street• 2 respondents mentioned 19th, Ferguson Farms, Valley Center, Wilson, 191, and Main/ Huffine were also mentioned Q2: Which of the above precedents do you think are good ones for corridors in Bozeman? • 11 responses to this question• 1 respondent noted that what makes Block 68, a precedent from Boise Idaho attractive is the park in front and the setbacks.• 1 respondent singled out the Ruh Building’s variable heights, brick exterior, and overall 3-story height.• 1 respondent noted that the Osborn “blends well by only having 3 stories streetside.” What people said about Corridor-oriented Development: “I think more intensive development on W. Oak and Durston makes a lot of sense because our two high schools are close to these areas. If more families lives along these corridors--and had commercial opportunities near them that would allow them to drive less--we could cut down on traffic and CO2 production as well as make these neighborhoods more livable.”DRAFT744 26 27INTERBORO Q1: Which Housing types would you like to see more if in Bozeman? • 22 responses to this question• 6 respondents wanted more apartments• 4 respondents wanted more affordable housing• 2 respondents wanted more duplexes • 2 respondents wanted more multi-use buildings• 2 respondents wanted more townhouses • 2 respondents wanted single-family houses Q2: Where in Bozeman would you like to see different types of housing? • 23 responses to this question• 4 respondents wrote “throughout”• 6 respondents singled out Downtown• 4 respondents singled out MSU• 2 respondents singled out Gallatin High School • The Hospital, Alder Creek, Chief Joseph, the West Side, and “undeveloped areas” were also mentioned What people said about Housing Diversity? “I think we’re getting too many identical 3 and 4 story apartment buildings, especially on the west side. I’d like to see mixed housing types throughout town.” “As Bozeman’s housing crisis continues I am more open to seeing townhomes and multi family homes that preserve that character, light, view, and open space of the town while increasing density of housing and access to these charms of Bozeman.” “Densification through height increases would be great for our town, as long as we get a proper affordability mix in these developments rather than only high-end development styles.” Q1: Where would you like to see taller buildings in Bozeman? • 23 responses to this question• 2 respondents wrote “nowhere;” 1 respondent wrote “anywhere”• 3 respondents were ok with increased heights so long as they accommodate affordable housing. Other sites mentioned were Oak and Rouse, and around Winders and 19th What people said about height limits? “People don’t like tall buildings here. Not everyone is down with density. New housing doesn’t create affordability. Filtering doesn’t work. Traffic is a problem: it’s not what we moved here for.” “Densification through height increases would be great for our town, as long as we get a proper affordability mix in these developments rather than only high-end development styles.” “ I would like to keep it isolated to downtown and main street area. I think if we can minimize the maximum height, it will keep the small town feel of Bozeman which is very important to me.”DRAFT745 28 29INTERBORO Q1: Where else could you see Neighborhood- Scale Commercial development in Bozeman? • 12 responses to this question• 1 respondent wrote “everywhere”• 2 respondents each singled out Downtown, Meadow Creek, Gran Cielo, and Gallatin High School • Joe’s Parkway, the area along Willson in South Bozeman, the area south of the hospital, the area around Peet’s, and the neighborhoods behind target / costco / winco were also singled out Q2: Is there anything you would change about these regulations? • 7 responses to this question• 2 respondents remarked that the existing regulations seem reasonable• 2 respondents singled out the Wild Crumb as a good example of neighborhood retail• 1 respondent wrote that “if B1 allowed much smaller businesses then I would be open to businesses contained in a house or garage.” What people said about Neighborhood-scale retail ? “I think neighborhood retail can be much smaller than what is outlined here; I would love to see corner coffee shops and bodegas interspersed with housing. the n/e neighborhood around Wild Crumb is a great example of this.” “I would change the requirement of there being offices so close to the homes and neighborhoods. Residents should be able to have a workplace more separate from their home.” “I think that the regulations as of now are well set. Our population is expanding rapidly and our city still needs enough housing as well as business and the regulations set now support both of these.” Q1: Which single-use districts should become multi- use districts? • 8 responses to this question• 3 respondents said “all”• 1 respondent underlined the need for buffers• 1 respondent wrote “it’s good how it is,” refering to the districts along Main Street What people said about Mixed-use Development: “There is room for multi-use everywhere and anywhere in Bozeman.” “Mixed use should not be put directly next to established neighborhoods without a buffer.” “I would like to see districts along W. Main Street became multi-use buildings, to both relieve the housing crisis and continue commercial development along Main Street.”DRAFT746 30 31INTERBORO Q1: How do you think solar panels should be regulated in Bozeman? • 20 responses to this question• 6 respondents think solar panels should be incentivized• 6 respondents think solar panels regulations should be streamlined• 5 respondents think solar panels should be required• 3 respondents think the city should educate people about solar panel rebates Specific policies to remove include: don’t require lines to be buried, get rid of setback regulations, Specific policies to add / preserve include: height restrictions, a soil survey, a roof inspection, runoff study, and a requirement that cables be burried. What people said about solar power generation: “I think they should not be heavily regulated as they are helpful too our city as a whole in our attempts to be environmentally conscious. I do not think they need to be blocked from the street because they are generally not eyesores and are known to helpful.” “I think that high restrictions should be in place when built on top of a roof, since they could disturb the mountain view so many love in Bozeman. I think the Missoula rule of burying cords underground is good, it makes them tidier and less invasive. I think they should be allowed in all districts as well. However, I think implementing the soil survey before building soil is beneficial to ensure stability as well as lessening the impact on the underground water table.” Q1: What would you like to see in a School-Oriented Development? • 13 responses to this question• 5 respondents underlined the importance of connectivity: connecting roads, trails, and bike lanes were all mentioned• 4 respondents thought that affordable housing was a critical component • 4 respondents thought open space was a critical component • 3 respondents mentioned mixed-use development; 2 singled out small stores Q2: Around what schools do you think there could be higher density? • 13 responses to this question• 1 respondent wrote “all of them”• 5 respondents nominated Gallatin • 2 respondents nominated the smaller elementary schools• 1 respondent singled out Chief Joseph What people said about School-oriented Development: “Elementary and middle schools; other programs and infrastructure needs to be incorporated including traffic calming, separated paths, walking school bus, safe routes to school.” “I would like School-Oriented Development near neighborhoods so it is easy for families to get to and from school, which will produce more walking and less driving. Also having retail and stores, grocery stores and food would make everything much more livable.” “Gallatin High School could use a higher density in retail, as there aren’t many nearby places students can visit at lunch.”DRAFT747 32 33INTERBORO “I would like to see more apartments in locations like downtown/more urban settings because they are a more affordable and efficient option.” “I think we should build more apartments in the more developed neighborhoods such as the Alder Creek neighborhood which contains mostly the same type of housing which are suited mainly for larger families/ groups of people.” “I would like to see more apartments, specifically affordable housing. I want to prevent urban sprawl and with affordable housing, it can lower the homeless population in Bozeman.” “[I would like to see] affordable housing that maintains character like condos and duplexes over apartment buildings and appropriate parking for these housing types so streets aren’t lined with cars.” “I would like to see more affordable townhouses and apartments because they take up very little space but house more people.” “More affordable housing for employees in the central parts of Bozeman and on the Northern Side of the highway. There should also be more affordable housing near the schools and the Wilson” “I would like to see open space, small stores and a variety of different houses to fit different family needs.” “I would like to see more single households as well as duplexes. I think more of these are needed to change it up. There are SO MANY apartments which can be hard on the eyes, if we change it up to be less bulky and in your face, it’ll look better.” “I would like to see more intensive development around Story Mill Park. More schools and places of work around this could prove beneficial.”“Oak, Durston, and Rouse could all use more intensive development. And I would like to see corridors along those streets.” “I think more intensive development on W. Oak and Durston makes a lot of sense because our two high schools are close to these areas.” Common Topics Discussed: “I would like to see districts along W. Main Street became multi-use buildings, to both relieve the housing crisis and con- tinue commercial development along Main Street.”DRAFT748 34 35INTERBORO There should be higher density around Gallatin High School. There is opportunity for growth and development. School-Oriented Development “The area around Gallatin high school is a great opportunity for school-oriented development.” School-Oriented Development “I’d like to see more affordable housing built around schools.” School-Oriented Development “I could see more Neighbor-hood-Scale Commerical development around Joe's Parkway.” Neighborhood-Scale Retail Neighborhood-Scale Retail “I’d like to see more affordable housing built around schools.” School-Oriented Development “There are too many identical 3 and 4 story apartment buildings, especially on the west side.” Housing Diversity “I would like to see different types of housing in the region near Chief Joesph and Gallatin High School.”Housing Diversity “I’d like to see different types of housing closer to downtown.” Housing Diversity “I’d like to see different types of housing along the main street area among the older architecture.” Housing Diversity “I’d like to see more apartments, especially affordable housing, in fields near the hospital.” Housing Diversity “Specifically just north of the 19th and Graf intersection, I would like to see more variety than just apartments and condos.” Housing Diversity “There should be neighborhood retail in the neighborhoods behind Target / Costco / Winco.”Neighborhood-Scale Retail “It would be good to see neighborhood retail along Rouse.” Neighborhood-Scale Retail “Our neighborhood fought a battle to keep Canyon Gate low; people don't like tall buildings here.”Height Limits “ More height on Babcock!” Height Limits “ More height on Mendenhall!” Height Limits “Don’t allow more height in Cooper Park.” Height Limits “I could see more Neighbor-hood-Scale Commerical development along Willson in South Bozeman .” Neighborhood-Scale Retail “I could see neighborhood-scale commercial development towards the south side of Bozeman: Meadow Creek and Gran Cielo neighborhoods. Since these parts of town have recently undergone development and there is still so much open space, it would be practical.” “There should be mixed-use devel-opment near the new high school.” School-Oriented Development “The NE corner of Rouse and Bridger is very confined due to wetlands, highway, RR x-ings, rivers, and hills. There are not enough options for traffic to flow if it is too densly developed.” Corner-Oriented Development Spatial Insights: There should be higher density around Gallatin High School. There is opportunity for growth and development. School-Oriented Development “The area around Gallatin high school is a great opportunity for school-oriented development.” School-Oriented Development “I’d like to see more affordable housing built around schools.” School-Oriented Development “I could see more Neighbor-hood-Scale Commerical development around Joe's Parkway.” Neighborhood-Scale Retail Neighborhood-Scale Retail “I’d like to see more affordable housing built around schools.” School-Oriented Development “There are too many identical 3 and 4 story apartment buildings, especially on the west side.” Housing Diversity “I would like to see different types of housing in the region near Chief Joesph and Gallatin High School.” Housing Diversity “I’d like to see different types of housing closer to downtown.” Housing Diversity “I’d like to see different types of housing along the main street area among the older architecture.” Housing Diversity “I’d like to see more apartments, especially affordable housing, in fields near the hospital.” Housing Diversity “Specifically just north of the 19th and Graf intersection, I would like to see more variety than just apartments and condos.” Housing Diversity “There should be neighborhood retail in the neighborhoods behind Target / Costco / Winco.” Neighborhood-Scale Retail “It would be good to see neighborhood retail along Rouse.” Neighborhood-Scale Retail “Our neighborhood fought a battle to keep Canyon Gate low; people don't like tall buildings here.” Height Limits “ More height on Babcock!” Height Limits “ More height on Mendenhall!” Height Limits “Don’t allow more height in Cooper Park.” Height Limits “I could see more Neighbor-hood-Scale Commerical development along Willson in South Bozeman .” Neighborhood-Scale Retail “I could see neighborhood-scale commercial development towards the south side of Bozeman: Meadow Creek and Gran Cielo neighborhoods. Since these parts of town have recently undergone development and there is still so much open space, it would be practical.” “There should be mixed-use devel-opment near the new high school.” School-Oriented Development “The NE corner of Rouse and Bridger is very confined due to wetlands, highway, RR x-ings, rivers, and hills. There are not enough options for traffic to flow if it is too densly developed.” Corner-Oriented Development DRAFT749 36 37INTERBORO 1 B1/B2 Building Our Future Together Initiative 1 BicycleInfrastructure Building Our Future Together Initiative 1 EV-ReadyInfrastructure Building Our Future Together Initiative 1 EnvironmentallySensitiveAreas Building Our Future Together Initiative 1 Low ImpactDevelopmentStandards Building Our Future Together Initiative 1 Planning forClimate Change Building Our Future Together Initiative 1 Residential Office/Business Park Building Our Future Together Initiative 1 Transitions Building Our Future Together Initiative 1 Tree Coverage Building Our Future Together Initiativecoming so on!coming soon!coming soon!coming soon!coming soon!coming soon!coming soon!coming soon!coming s oon! As our next steps, we will continue to compile responses to brochures received in person, at city hall, and online. We will also work to develop the following list of brochures to align with the topics that City Commission is providing guidance on in the next phase of the project. B1/B2 Bicycle Infrastructure EV-Ready Infrastructure Environmentally Sensitive Areas Low Impact Development (LID) Standards Planning for Climate Change Residential Office/Buisness Park Transitions Tree Converage *This report is not a complete summary of engagement efforts to date. More information can be found on the overall engagement efforts that have been undertaken in addition to the Mobile Engagement Station and Intercept Activities at the Engage Bozeman site: https://engage.bozeman.net Next Steps:DRAFT750 38 INTERBOROProduced by:INTERBORO Produced for:DRAFT751