HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-10-23 Public Comment - A. Hoitsma - Feb. 14 Consent AgendaFrom:Amy Kelley Hoitsma
To:Agenda
Cc:reno walsh
Subject:Feb. 14 Consent Agenda
Date:Friday, February 10, 2023 4:19:47 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you
recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Honorable Mayor Andrus, Deputy Mayor Cunningham, Commissioner Coburn,Commissioner Madgic, and Commissioner Pomeroy:
I was surprised to see on the Regular Meeting Agenda for Tuesday, February 14, 2023, under
“Consent” items:
G.11 Reconsideration of the Cloverleaf Zone Map Amendment Decision; theCloverleaf Zone Map Amendment Requested Amending the City Zoning Map fora City Block Bounded by East Cottonwood Street, Ida Avenue, East Peach Street,and Plum Avenue Consisting of Approximately 3.1995 Acres and theAccompanying Adjacent Rights-of way from NEHMU (Northeast Historic MixedUse) to B-2M (Community Business District Mixed) (Rogers)
It was my understanding that Consent items are things that had been previously agreed to at a
prior Commission meeting, and that it is somewhat “housekeeping” to approve the Consentitems en masse at the start of a Commission meeting, without discussion or public comment.
I was unable to attend last week’s Commission meeting, where you discussed and voted to
approve TIF funding for the Cloverleaf proposal, but I was able to view the video thismorning. The question of whether the Commission was being asked to change the zoning for
this project came up several times, and it was clarified in no uncertain terms that theCommission was voting ONLY on the question of TIF funding and deed restrictions on the
property related to maximum building heights and affordable housing units.
The staff memo associated with this Consent item refers to Bozeman Municipal Code Sec.2.02.100: Rules of debate; reconsideration; conflict of interest. The staff memo says: “The
City Commission’s rules of procedure authorize the Commission to reconsider previousdecisions” and that nothing prevents “any commissioner from making or remaking the same or
any other motion at a subsequent meeting of the commission, but the matter must be dulyscheduled as an agenda item.”
In referring to the full paragraph, however, it reads:
D. Reconsideration of previous commission action. A motion to reconsider anyaction taken by the commission must be made on the day such action was taken. Itmust be made either immediately during the same session, or at a recessed andreconvened session thereof. Such motion shall be made by a commissioner of theprevailing side, but may be seconded by any commissioner, and may be made atany time and have precedence over all other motions or while a commissioner hasthe floor. It shall be debatable. Nothing herein shall be construed to prevent anycommissioner from making or remaking the same or any other motion at asubsequent meeting of the commission, but the matter must be duly scheduled as
an agenda item.
Did Mayor Andrus, or Commissioner Madgic or Commissioner Coburn (“the prevailingside”), make a motion to reconsider the vote taken by the City Commission at the time the
vote was taken? To my knowledge this did not happen.
Is it protocol for City staff to place reconsideration of a City Commission vote on the agendaas a Consent item? Is the staff essentially telling the Commission that they voted “wrong” and
should vote on the same issue again — with a different outcome?
After thorough and thoughtful consideration of information presented and knowledge of Citycode, a majority of the City Commission already denied the previously requested zone map
amendment to change the zoning from NEHMU to B-2M. It was pointed out that the area doesnot meet the requirements set out in the definition of B-2M zoning in the Bozeman Municipal
Code because it is not an “arterial corridor,” nor is it a “commercial node,” and it is not"served by transit.”
Mayor Andrus, among your thoughtful and well-reasoned comments explaining your vote
against the zone map amendment, you made the statement: “I believe that [B-2M] zoning istoo intense for this particular area at this time.” You also noted that the Commission was
bound to vote on specific criteria outlined in code, not based on a site plan that has yet toundergo the development review process.
My question is why is City staff is “suggesting an opportunity to reconsider this decision,” and
whether it is appropriate for City staff—rather than a City Commissioner—to place an item ofthis nature on the Consent agenda.
Thank you for considering this important matter.
With my best,
Amy Kelley Hoitsma
706 E. Peach StreetBozeman, MT 59715
406-581-1513