Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-20-25 Public Comment - K. Adams, Gallatin Valley Sentinel - Public CommentFrom:The Gallatin Valley Sentinel To:Bozeman Goverment Study Commission Cc:The Gallatin Valley Sentinel Subject:[EXTERNAL]Public Comment Date:Wednesday, August 20, 2025 4:58:36 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. Hello, Please see the below public comment that was delivered at today's Study CommissionMeeting. Thank you. Hello, my name is Katie Adams, Bozeman resident, and I am delivering this public comment on behalf of The Gallatin Valley Sentinel. In the coming weeks, we will be sharing our analysis of the Study Commission’s decision tohire Working Ventures as its Communication Strategist and our evaluation of the study process thus far. But I am calling today to directly address comments made in the last meetingby some of the study commissioners regarding the public comment that was received on the commission’s decision of who to hire for the role of Communication Strategist. Study Commissioner Strout made it a point more than once in the last meeting that the publiccomments that you received were inspired by a call to action sent out by our organization. We want to make clear the fact that if people were motivated to write in after receivinginformation from the Sentinel does not diminish the validity of their comments. Residents responded because they care deeply about how this commission makes decisions, and tosuggest otherwise risks dismissing their voices simply because of HOW they found out about the opportunity to provide feedback. This is no different than how many of the organizationsCommissioner Strout is affiliated with operate, and you know this. This is how organizing works. Neighbors talk to neighbors, organizations share information, and people took the timeto write because they care. To somehow imply that the public comments were “manufactured” is nothing more than an attempt to minimize voices you don’t agree with and is hypocritical. Secondly, Commissioner Strout commented that she wishes that the public had been present atthe meeting to engage with them in the process and to have the direct opportunity to have those conversations. Your meeting times occur during the work-day for most people, andthose people rely on recordings and meeting summaries to follow what is going on. Because they were not there in person does not mean they are somehow less engaged or less entitled tobe heard. Most people have jobs and families to focus on. The interviews with the candidates occurred at your meeting on a Wednesday night, and you required public comment to be submitted by 5 p.m. that Friday, which is too quick of aturnaround time to reasonably expect public engagement. This is wholly unacceptable and does not give the public confidence that your group is going to truly represent the public’s bestinterests. Our organization is the only organization that is covering the broad spectrum of issues facing our city today. We have been covering the local government study since beforelast November’s election, and all of our work is done by unpaid volunteers, not paid activists. The Gallatin Valley Sentinel exists to make people aware of what is going on in our city'sgovernment, and the decisions being made. We provide our network all of the necessary resources – in this case, the link to the RFP, links to the candidates’ proposals, and timestampsto their interviews – and encourage people to review the materials to form their own opinions. We also want to address the comments made by several of you that those who submitted public comment didn’t seem to understand the RFP criteria or the role of the strategist. I canspeak personally to this, and having been a manager for over 10 years, I have done a lot of hiring, and when you have two candidates who are equally capable of doing a job, youevaluate more nuanced criteria – in this case, the people who took the time to engage believed that a candidate who was local and able to come to Bozeman frequently was a distinguishingfactor; they preferred his extensive background in surveys and approach to collecting data; and they thought that his experience as a professor and educator would be beneficial in being ableto break down a topic as complex as our local government in a way that is understandable. He would also not need to rely upon the MSU Local Government Center to get up to speed onhow all this works, which would actually indicate that he was the most qualified candidate. The residents of Bozeman voted to have this government study because they don’t feel heard by their current elected officials, and they believe that examining how their local governmentis structured might somehow change that. We would hope that going forward, the Study Commission will be happy to see people starting to engage in your process, rather thancriticize how they decide to get engaged. You were elected to listen and learn, not to dictate and dismiss.