HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-05-25 Public Comment - R. Callahan - Re_ A return to the cronyism of days past when public comment was disdained and utterly ignoredFrom:RC
To:Bozeman Public Comment
Subject:[EXTERNAL]Re: A return to the cronyism of days past when public comment was disdained and utterly ignored
Date:Monday, May 5, 2025 3:58:26 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.
Dear Mayor, Deputy Mayor, and Commissioners,
I'm writing today with grave concern that public feedback on the UDC is being summarizedinaccurately before all feedback is even collected.
The staff memo attached to the Community Development Board agenda for May 5, 2025 is
attempting to artificially limit the scope of the UDC rewrite, and mis-characterizes publicfeedback by omitting several important areas of concern.
Why did you have us participate in engagement around the UDC's impact on the
environment if staff is now trying to suggest incorrectly that this is beyond the scope of theproject?
Updates to the UDC have been proposed to code in articles 1 through 8, which include the
areas of environmental impact in which residents have proposed code changes.
If these concerns are relegated to future "plans" they will never be codified.
Plans are not code.
This is not acceptable!
Moreover, public comment has been inaccurately summarized in the same staff memo:
The memo states, “Formatting - Comments to date on revised formatting have been positivewith people appreciating the increased graphics and organization.”
This is incorrect. Many community members expressed dissatisfaction with the images used
in the draft UDC because they do *not* accurately represent the mass and scale of proposedconstruction in the context of existing neighborhoods.
By using an axonometric view rather than a street elevation of proposed building forms, the
draft code seems to unethically hide the true incompatibility of the proposed allowanceswith existing neighborhood conditions.
The staff memo also states, “Sustainability – Amendments proposed in this area, such as
urban agriculture, have received little comment. Compact development is also an element ofsustainability and comments relating to that overlap with the zoning districts subject.”
This statement is not only misleading - because while the community didn’t object to urban
agriculture, or electric vehicle charging stations - it completely leaves out any summary of
public feedback relating to solar access, a deconstruction ordinance, urban tree protections,or water adequacy!
Suggesting that compact development is sustainable is an oversimplification and an attempt
to force your high-density at all costs agenda on us, ignoring the unsustainability of puttingexisting housing in the landfill, or historic preservation concerns that our community has
voiced frequently!
We are being deliberately ignored!
Staff yet again is not listening to the people who live here and instead elevating their inputover that if their constituents!!!
It's like we are reliving groundhog day from the Jeff Mihelich // Anna Bentley days with city
staff again making clear their *complete disdain and utter lack of respect* for the views ofthose who have to figure out a way to survive in this town based on income earned in this
town, at the same time that city and county while taxes have *virtually tripled in the past 15years!*
Again, city staff is kow-towing to developers and second home owners in it's race to raze
affordable housing and replace it with million dollar condos that no one who lives and workshere can afford!
If you are serious about rebuilding public trust, you need to address this behavior among
your staff, and hold them to an unbiased compilation of feedback - not just from those whoagree with staff but equally if not more critically from those who disagree.
Thank you,
Renee Callahan717 N. Rouse Ave.
Bozeman MT