HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-14-25 - Board of Ethics - Agendas & Packet MaterialsA. Call meeting to order
B. Changes to the Agenda
C. Approval of Minutes
C.1 Approve the minutes from September 16, 2024, December 9, 2024, and February 26,
2025(Maas)
D. Public Comments on Non-agenda Items Falling within the Purview and Jurisdiction of the Board
THE BOARD OF ETHICS OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA
BOE AGENDA
Tuesday, October 14, 2025
General information about the Board of Ethics is available our Board of Ethics webpage.
If you are interested in commenting in writing on items on the agenda please send an email to
comments@bozeman.net or visit the Public Comment Page prior to 12:00pm on the day of the
meeting. Anonymous public comments are not distributed to the board or staff.
Public comments will also be accepted in-person and through Video Conference during the appropriate
agenda items.
As always, the meeting will be streamed through the Commission's video page and available in the
City on cable channel 190.
For more information please contact Greg Sullivan, gsullivan@bozeman.net
This meeting will be held both in-person and also using an online video conferencing system. You
can join this meeting:
Via Video Conference:
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
+1 669 444 9171
Access code: 942 8266 5114
Consider the Motion: I move to approve the minutes as submitted.
This is the time to comment on any non-agenda matter falling within the scope of the Board of
Ethics. There will also be time in conjunction with each agenda item for public comment relating
to that item but you may only speak once per topic.
Please note, the Board cannot take action on any item which does not appear on the agenda. All
persons addressing the Board shall speak in a civil and courteous manner and members of the
audience shall be respectful of others. Please state your name, and state whether you are a
resident of the city or a property owner within the city in an audible tone of voice for the record
1
E. Special Presentation
F. Action Items
F.1 Review the City's Annual Staff Ethics Training Curriculum (2025)(Giuttari)
F.2 Review the City's Annual Boards' Ethics Training Curriculum (Maas)
G. FYI/Discussion
G.1 Review and Discuss the Board of Ethics Workplan and Schedule Future Meetings
H. Adjournment
and limit your comments to three minutes.
I move to approve the City's annual staff ethics training curriculum in accordance with the City's
Charter.
Consider the Motion: I move to approve the City's annual boards' ethics training curriculum in
accordance with the City's Charter.
This board meets as needed.
Board of Ethics meetings are open to all members of the public. If you have a disability that requires
assistance, please contact our Acting ADA Coordinator, Max Ziegler, at 406.582.2439
2
Memorandum
REPORT TO:Board of Ethics
FROM:Mike Maas, City Clerk
SUBJECT:Approve the minutes from September 16, 2024, December 9, 2024, and
February 26, 2025
MEETING DATE:October 14, 2025
AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:Consider the Motion: I move to approve the minutes as submitted.
STRATEGIC PLAN:1.1 Outreach: Continue to strengthen and innovate in how we deliver
information to the community and our partners.
BACKGROUND:The September 16, 2024, December 9, 2024, and February 26, 2025,
meeting minutes are attached for review.
UNRESOLVED ISSUES:none
ALTERNATIVES:none
FISCAL EFFECTS:none
Attachments:
02-26-25 Board of Ethics Minutes.docx
09-16-24 Board of Ethics Minutes.docx
12-09-24 Board of Ethics Minutes.docx
Report compiled on: October 10, 2025
3
Bozeman Board of Ethics Meeting Minutes, February 26, 2025
Page 1 of 2
THE CITY COMMMISSION MEETING OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA
MINUTES
February 26, 2025
Present: Sara Rushing, Mark Bond, Jim Drummond
Absent: None
Excused: None
Staff Preset at the Dais: City Attorney (CA) Greg Sullivan, Deputy City Clerk (DCC) Alex Newby
A) 00:13:53 Call meeting to order
B) 00:14:13 Disclosures
C) 00:14:22 Changes to the Agenda
D) 00:14:25 Public Comments on Non-agenda Items Falling within the Purview and
Jurisdiction of the Board
There was no Public Comment
E) 00:15:17 Action Items
E.1 00:15:19 Recommend the City Commission adopt the revised City of Bozeman
Ethics Handbook
Ethics Handbook 2025 FINAL for EB 2 21 25 CLEAN.pdf
00:15:31 Action Item Introduction
00:15:57 Staff Presentation
Assistant City Attorney (ACA) Jen Guittiari presented the Review of the City's Ethics Handbook,
Overview, Summary of Key Revisions, Next Steps.
00:22:04 Questions of Staff
00:28:08 Public Comment
4
Bozeman Board of Ethics Meeting Minutes, February 26, 2025
Page 2 of 2
There was no Public Comment
00:28:38 Motion to recommend Having reviewed and considered the updates made to the Bozeman
Ethics Handbook, I move to recommend the City Commission approve the updated Bozeman Ethics
Handbook.
Jim Drummond: Motion
Sara Rushing: 2nd
00:28:41 Vote on the Motion to recommend Having reviewed and considered the updates made to the
Bozeman Ethics Handbook, I move to recommend the City Commission approve the updated Bozeman
Ethics Handbook. The Motion carried 3 - 0.
Approve:
Sara Rushing
Mark Bond
Jim Drummond
Disapprove:
None
E.2 00:28:57 Work Session on Substantive Provisions of the Code of Ethics.
F) 00:29:39 FYI/Discussion
G) 00:30:52 Adjournment
This board meets as needed.
5
Bozeman Board of Ethics Meeting Minutes, September 16, 2024
Page 1 of 3
THE CITY COMMMISSION MEETING OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA
MINUTES
September 16, 2024
Roll Call: Chair Sarah Rushing, Board Member Kristin Taylor, Board Member Mark Bond
Staff Present at the Dias: City Attorney (CA) Greg Sullivan, Deputy City Clerk (DCC) Alex Newby
A) 00:16:42 Call meeting to order
B) 00:17:50 Disclosures
C) 00:18:07 Changes to the Agenda
D) 00:18:16 Public Service Announcements
E) 00:18:48 Approval of Minutes
E.1 Approve the minutes from June 6, 2024
06-06-24 Board of Ethics Minutes.docx
F) 00:19:24 Action Items
Board Chair Sarah Rushing introduced Action Items.
F.1 Review the City's Annual Staff Ethics Training Curriculum
2024 Staff Ethics Scenarios-Citations.final.docx
00:19:57 Staff Presentation
City Clerk Mike Maas presented the Review of the City's Annual Staff Ethics Training Curriculum.
Introduction. Role of Trainers, Group Discussion if Scenario, New ways of providing feedback/scenarios.
Explanation of how scenarios will be used.
00:22:45 Questions of Staff
00:29:48 Public Comment
6
Bozeman Board of Ethics Meeting Minutes, September 16, 2024
Page 2 of 3
There was no public comment
00:32:10 Motion to approve the City's annual staff ethics training curriculum in accordance with the
City's Charter.
Mark Bond: Motion
Kristin Taylor: 2nd
00:32:22 Vote on the Motion to approve the City's annual staff ethics training curriculum in accordance
with the City's Charter. The Motion carried 3 - 0.
Approve:
Sara Rushing
Kristin Taylor
Mark Bond
Disapprove:
None
F.2 00:32:32 Review the City's Annual Boards' Ethics Training Curriculum
2024 board scenarios with citations.docx
00:32:40 Staff Presentation
City Clerk Mike Maas presented the Review of the City's Annual Boards' Ethics Training Curriculum.
Challenges with this training. Majority of big five boards have had training. This training will be
scheduled during regular meeting times.
Questions of Staff
00:37:22 Public Comment
There was no public comment
F.3 00:38:51 Revise the Bozeman Code of Ethics
Board of Ethics Prop. Rev. Complaint Process.pdf
00:42:00 Staff Presentation
Assistant City Attorney Jennifer Giuttari presented the Revision of the Bozeman Code of Ethics.
Overview, Purpose of Work Session, Sec. 2.03.610 - Who May Request Board Action, Sec. 2.03.630(A) -
City Attorney Opinions, Sec. 2.03.630* - City Attorney Ethics Opinions Proposed Revisions, Requests
from the Public, Requests from Public Officials and Employees, Sec. 2.03.640 - Ethics Complaints,
PROPOSED Board of Ethics Complaint Process (Flow Chart), and the Next Steps.
00:49:42 Questions of Staff
01:00:42 Staff Presentation continued
7
Bozeman Board of Ethics Meeting Minutes, September 16, 2024
Page 3 of 3
01:16:00 Further questions of staff
01:44:26 Public Comment
There was no Public Comment
G) 01:45:09 Public Comments on Non-agenda Items Falling within the Purview and
Jurisdiction of the Board
There was no Public Comment
H) 01:46:40 FYI/Discussion
Thank you to Kristin Taylor for serving on the Board of Ethics
I) 01:48:14 Adjournment
8
Bozeman Board of Ethics Meeting Minutes, December 9, 2024
Page 1 of 3
THE CITY COMMMISSION MEETING OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA
MINUTES
December 9, 2024
A) 00:08:42 Call meeting to order
Present: Sara Rushing, Mark Bond, Jim Drummond
Absent: None
Excused: None
B) 00:10:07 Disclosures
C) 00:10:16 Changes to the Agenda
D) 00:10:25 Action Items
D.1 00:10:26 Review of and Recommendation to the City Commission Regarding
Proposed Ordinance Amending Ethics Opinions and Complaint Procedures, and
Adoption of Board of Ethics Resolution 2024-01 Establishing Hearing Rules of
Procedures
Ex. A. Ethics Code Revisions Ord.pdf
Ex. B. BOE Complaint Process flowchart.pdf
Ex. C. BOE Resolution 2024-01-Appx A final.pdf
00:11:52 Staff Presentation
Assistant City Attorney (ACA) Jen Giuttari presented the sections of recommended changes in a
proposed ordinance.
00:20:50 Questions of Staff
00:21:33 Presentation continued
ACA Giuttari presented the rules of procedure proposed by Board of Ethics Resolution 2024-01.
00:30:59 Questions of Staff
9
Bozeman Board of Ethics Meeting Minutes, December 9, 2024
Page 2 of 3
00:32:54 ACA Giuttari concluded her presentation and provided the next steps.
CA Sullivan provided additional clarity on the unresolved issues portion of the Staff memo.
00:34:30 Questions of Staff
00:44:53 Public Comment
There were no public comments on this item.
00:45:35 Motion to approve Having reviewed and considered the draft ordinance amending ethics
opinions and complaint procedures, I hereby move to recommend the City Commission approve said
draft ordinance.
Sara Rushing: Motion
Mark Bond: 2nd
00:45:49 Discussion
00:49:00 Vote on the Motion to approve Having reviewed and considered the draft ordinance amending
ethics opinions and complaint procedures, I hereby move to recommend the City Commission approve said
draft ordinance. The Motion carried 3 - 0.
Approve:
Sara Rushing
Mark Bond
Jim Drummond
Disapprove:
None
00:50:26 Public comment
00:49:21 Motion to approve Having reviewed and considered Resolution 2024-01 which establishes
Board of Ethics Hearing Rules of Procedure, I move to approve Board Resolution 2024-01.
Sara Rushing: Motion
Jim Drummond: 2nd
00:50:56 Discussion
00:51:06 Vote on the Motion to approve Having reviewed and considered Resolution 2024-01 which
establishes Board of Ethics Hearing Rules of Procedure, I move to approve Board Resolution 2024-01. The
Motion carried 3 - 0.
10
Bozeman Board of Ethics Meeting Minutes, December 9, 2024
Page 3 of 3
Approve:
Sara Rushing
Mark Bond
Jim Drummond
Disapprove:
None
E) 00:51:20 Public Comments on Non-agenda Items Falling within the Purview and
Jurisdiction of the Board
F) 00:51:55 FYI/Discussion
G) 01:02:45 Adjournment
This board meets as needed.
11
Memorandum
REPORT TO:Board of Ethics
FROM:Greg Sullivan, City Attorney
Jennifer Giuttari, Assistant City Attorney
SUBJECT:Review the City's Annual Staff Ethics Training Curriculum (2025)
MEETING DATE:October 14, 2025
AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Administration
RECOMMENDATION:I move to approve the City's annual staff ethics training curriculum in
accordance with the City's Charter.
STRATEGIC PLAN:7.1 Values-Driven Culture: Promote a values-driven organizational culture
that reinforces ethical behavior, exercises transparency and maintains the
community's trust.
BACKGROUND:The City's Charter requires an annual ethics training of all city employees
regarding the state and city ethics codes. The 2025 staff ethics training will
take place from from October 20 - 30, 2025. Prior to the training, the Board
of Ethics must approve the ethics curriculum.
This year's training will be conducted in small groups. Each group will be
given one to two scenarios to discuss. This is the same format as last year,
and it was observed that the small group method allowed for a more
detailed discussion of the scenarios. Prior to concluding the hour long
training, each small group will be asked to summarize to the entire group
their scenario and discussion.
UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None identified.
ALTERNATIVES:None suggested.
FISCAL EFFECTS:None
Attachments:
2025 Staff Ethics Training Curriculum.pdf
Report compiled on: October 8, 2025
12
Greg Sullivan, City Attorney
Bekki McLean, Chief Prosecutor
Anna Saverud, Chief Civil Attorney
Bjorn Boyer, Assistant City Attorney
Ashley Carroll, Assistant City Attorney
Kaity Cuellar, Assistant City Attorney
Jennifer Giuttari, Assistant City Attorney
Sarah Kiser, Assistant City Attorney
Erin Murphy, Assistant City Attorney
Kelley Rischke, Assistant City Attorney
TDD: 406-582-2301 THE MOST LIVABLE PLACE
A 121 NORTH ROUSE AVENUE F P.O. BOX 1230
BOZEMAN, MT 59771-1230 P 406-582-2309 F 406-582-2302 WWW.BOZEMAN.NET
TO: Bozeman Board of Ethics
FROM: Greg Sullivan, City Attorney
Jennifer Giuttari, Assistant City Attorney
DATE: October 8, 2025
RE: 2025 Staff Ethics Training Curriculum
Scenario 1:
A City employee is tired of dating sites. One day, an applicant comes into the employee’s
department to drop off information for a City project. The information was labeled for one of the
employee’s colleagues. The employee was immediately interested in the applicant, but had no
idea who the applicant was. Curious, they looked over the information packet and got the
applicant’s name, date of birth, and work information. They then went online to find more
personal information about the applicant. What are the ethical considerations?
• Citations:
1. Sec. 2.03.490. Standards of conduct.
A. Officials and employees shall conduct themselves with propriety, discharge their
duties impartially and fairly, and make continuing efforts toward attaining and
maintaining high standards of conduct.
B. No official or employee shall improperly use, directly or indirectly, the official or
employee's city position to secure any financial interest or personal interest for said
official employee, or others.
➢ "Personal interest" means any interest in the matter which would affect the action
of the official or employee other than a financial interest, and other than an
interest because of membership in, or affiliation with, but not employment by a
social, fraternal, charitable, service, educational, religious, governmental, health
service, philanthropic, cultural, or similar nonprofit institution or organization.
2. Montana Code Annotated § 2-2-103. Public trust -- public duty. (1) The holding
of public office or employment is a public trust, created by the confidence that the
electorate reposes in the integrity of judicial officers, public officers, legislators, and
public employees. A judicial officer, public officer, judge, legislator, or public
employee shall carry out the individual's duties for the benefit of the people of the
state.
13
2025 Staff Ethics Curriculum
2 of 11
3. Sec. 2.03.530. Confidential information.
A. No official or employee shall, without legal authority, disclose confidential
information concerning the personnel, property, government, or affairs of the city.
B. No official or employee shall use confidential information to advance such
official or employee's own financial or personal interest or the financial or personal
interests of any other person.
➢ Sec. 2.03.470. Definitions. “Confidential information" means any
information which is not available to the general public and which is
obtained only by reason of an official's or employee's position.
4. Sec. 2.03.510. Treatment of the public. City officials and employees represent the
city government to the public. In their contact with the public, officials and
employees must bear in mind their role as public servants. Each member of the public
shall be treated courteously, impartially, and fairly. All employees and officials shall,
in the exercise of their official duties, refrain from taking any action, making of any
statement, or authoring any document that is intended to harass, intimidate, or
retaliate against any member of the public.
5. Admin. Order 2020-04 – Internet & Cell phone usage policy.
A. Sec. 5.1: …limited personal use of City’s network that does not interfere with
City work is authorized. However, all users agree they have no expectation of
privacy in the contents or search histories of such internet use.
B. Sec. 6.4 – Personal Use: Employees who are assigned to carry a city-provided
phone or data device may use the device for limited personal use. When an
employee or official uses a cell phone for personal use the employee or official
specifically recognizes any privacy interests in the contents, the sender, or the
recipients of any data transferred via the device is greatly reduced. This includes
text messages or other messaging. Employees wishing to maintain complete
privacy in their personal communications must use a personal device for those
communications.
C. Sec. 8.1: Allegations of misuse must be promptly reported to supervisor, and
supervisor must report the allegation to the IT Director.
• Follow-up discussion questions:
1. What if the employee used their work phone versus their personal phone to document
the information?
2. The application process – including the application itself & at what stage an
application is in – is public information. So, when does confidentiality become an
issue? Can an employee release PII of an applicant?
14
2025 Staff Ethics Curriculum
3 of 11
Scenario 2:
It is a beautiful fall day, and a Parks and Rec employee wakes up to see leaves all over their
neighborhood’s road. The employee remembers that there are leaf blowers in one of the City
buildings they have access to. They realize they can use a city leaf blower to help their elderly
neighbors by cleaning up the street. Knowing the Parks and Rec crew will be gone after 4 pm,
the employee confidently borrows a leaf blower. In appreciation, a neighbor gives them a home
baked pie. What are the ethical considerations?
• Citations:
1. Sec. 2.03.500 Use of City Resources. No official or employee shall use,
or permit the use of, city-owned vehicles, equipment, material, or city
personnel for personal use of the employee or official or anyone else or to
be used in any manner prohibited by state statutes or city ordinance.
2. Sec. 2.03.490. Standards of conduct. (D) Standards of conduct. No
official or employee shall improperly use, directly or indirectly, the
official or employee's city position to secure any financial interest or
personal interest for said official, employee, or others.
A. "Personal interest" means any interest in the matter which would affect
the action of the official or employee other than a financial interest, and
other than an interest because of membership in, or affiliation with, but
not employment by a social, fraternal, charitable, service, educational,
religious, governmental, health service, philanthropic, cultural, or
similar nonprofit institution or organization.
B. Sec. 2.03.540. Gifts, gratuities, and favors.
A. Legislative intent. “… this section ensures city employees are not
influenced in the performance of their work by outside persons or
entities in a manner that entices the employee or public officers to shift
their commitment and dedication away from public service to their
own personal interests or the interests of an outside entity or person.”
B. No official or employee shall accept a gift, gratuity, or favor from any
person or entity:
1. That would tend improperly to influence a reasonable person in the
person's position to depart from the faithful and impartial discharge of
the person's public duties;
2. That the person knows or that a reasonable person in that position
should know under the circumstances is primarily for the purpose of
rewarding the person for official action taken; or
3. Has a value of $100.00 or more for an individual.
C. An employee or official may accept a gift, gratuity, or favor that has a
value greater than $25.00 but less than $100.00 for an individual only
if such gift, gratuity or favor:
15
2025 Staff Ethics Curriculum
4 of 11
1. Complies with 2.03.540.B.1 and 2; and
2. Is provided incidental to and in conjunction with a public event
where the official or employee's attendance is in fulfillment of their
official duties.
D. 1. An employee or official may accept a gift, gratuity, or favor that has
a value greater than $25.00 but less than $100.00 for an individual
only if such gift, gratuity or favor that complies with 2.03.540.B.1 and
2 and is provided incidental to and in conjunction with a public event
where the official or employee's attendance is in fulfillment of their
official duties.
2. An employee or official may accept payment or reimbursement
from a person or entity for necessary expenses such as travel, lodging,
meals, and registration fees in excess of $100.00 if the expense is
incurred while representing the city and the reimbursement would not
violate 2.03.540.B.1 and 2. Reimbursement or payment for educational
activities in excess of $100.00 is permissible if the payment or
reimbursement does not place or appear to place the official or
employee under obligation, clearly serves the public good, and is not
lavish or extravagant.
• Follow-up discussion questions:
1. Does it matter that it is a City street that will be cleaned on the City’s street
cleaning schedule?
16
2025 Staff Ethics Curriculum
5 of 11
Scenario 3:
A City Employee is a music lover. Their favorite band, the Flaming Squirrels, is playing Music
on Main this Thursday. This year the City is one of the sponsors of this event. The employee
goes directly to Music on Main from work wearing a City branded shirt. Knowing they have a
safe server certificate, the employee’s friend enlists them to serve beer because they are short
staffed. A citizen that the employee has had problems with at work is in line at the beer garden.
This citizen has filed complaints about the employee with the employee’s supervisor and has
also submitted public comments to the Commission questioning employee’s motivation and
ethics during their interactions. When it is the citizen’s turn in line, the employee refuses to
serve them. What are the ethical considerations?
• Citations:
1. Sec. 2.03.490. Standards of conduct.
A. Officials and employees have an obligation to act morally and honestly in
discharging their responsibilities.
B. Officials and employees shall conduct themselves with propriety, discharge
their duties impartially and fairly, and make continuing efforts toward attaining
and maintaining high standards of conduct.
C. No official or employee shall retaliate against any employee, official, or
member of the public regarding an allegation of improper governmental action
because that employee, official, or member of the public proceeded or is
proceeding in good faith under this division including acting under section
2.03.580.D.
2. Sec. 2.03.510. Treatment of the public. City officials and employees represent
the city government to the public. In their contact with the public, officials and
employees must bear in mind their role as public servants. Each member of the
public shall be treated courteously, impartially, and fairly. All employees and
officials shall, in the exercise of their official duties, refrain from taking any
action, making of any statement, or authoring any document that is intended to-
harass, intimidate, or retaliate against any member of the public.
3. HR Policy on Outside Employment. Employees must complete an Outside
Employment Request form, which is available on the intranet. The request must
be approved by the employee’s supervisor, the dept. director, the Human
Resources Director, and the City Manager.
• Follow-up discussion questions:
1. What if the employee forgot they were wearing logo wear and it was a sincere
mistake?
2. What if they are not wearing logo wear, but still refuse to serve the citizen?
3. What if they don’t clock out before attending? Is there a difference with being on
the clock?
4. If paid, and still on the clock, are they “double-dipping?” If so, what’s the issue?
What if they took PTO to work at the beer garden?
17
2025 Staff Ethics Curriculum
6 of 11
5. What if they are being paid to serve in the beer garden or accepting tips? Does
this count as secondary employment?
18
2025 Staff Ethics Curriculum
7 of 11
Scenario 4:
Taylor Swift announces a surprise intimate show at a small, local venue. The City’s HR Director
and a longtime fan is thrilled to snag a ticket. When the night arrives, the HR Director shows up,
hoping for a spot near the stage. To their frustration, the line is already extended several blocks
down the street. Word spread quickly that the venue’s ticketing system over sold the show and
that many people with tickets will be turned away at the door. Worried they might not get in, the
HR Director heads straight to the front to speak with a staff member. The staff person hesitates
but then directs them toward the back of the line anyway. The venue’s manager comes out and
recognizes the HR Director. Knowing its business license is up for renewal, the manager ushers
the HR Director into the show. What are the ethical considerations?
• Citations:
1. Sec. 2.03.460. Declaration of policy. (prohibition of public office for
private gain) The proper operation of the city government requires that public
officials and employees be independent, impartial, accountable, and
responsible; that governmental policies and decisions be made in the proper
channels of the governmental structure; that public office and employment not
be used for personal gain nor be used to harass, intimidate, or retaliate against
citizens and other employees and officials; and that the public have
confidence in the integrity of its government. The purpose of this code of
ethics is to set forth standards of ethical conduct, to assist public officials and
employees in establishing guidelines for their conduct, to foster the
development and maintenance of a tradition of responsible, accountable and
effective public service, and to prohibit conflict between public duty and
private interest. Nothing herein shall be construed to relieve any employee or
official of the responsibilities set forth in MCA 2-2-104, 2-2-105, 2-2-121, 2-
2-131, and 7-5-4109.
2. Sec. 2.03.540. Gifts, gratuities, and favors. Legislative intent. “… this
section ensures city employees are not influenced in the performance of their
work by outside persons or entities in a manner that entices the employee or
public officers to shift their commitment and dedication away from public
service to their own personal interests or the interests of an outside entity or
person.”
A. No official or employee shall accept a gift, gratuity, or favor from any
person or entity:
i. That would tend improperly to influence a reasonable person in the
person's position to depart from the faithful and impartial discharge of the
person's public duties;
19
2025 Staff Ethics Curriculum
8 of 11
ii. That the person knows or that a reasonable person in that position
should know under the circumstances is primarily for the purpose of
rewarding the person for official action taken; or
iii. Has a value of $100.00 or more for an individual.
C. An employee or official may accept a gift, gratuity, or favor that has a
value greater than $25.00 but less than $100.00 for an individual only if such
gift, gratuity or favor:
1. Complies with 2.03.540.B.1 and 2; and
2. Is provided incidental to and in conjunction with a public event
where the official or employee's attendance is in fulfillment of their
official duties.
• Follow-up questions for discussion:
1. Is this a gift if the HR Director already purchased a ticket ~ use to discuss
perception since others observing may not know they had purchased a ticket
20
2025 Staff Ethics Curriculum
9 of 11
Scenario 5:
A City employee is fed up with a software vendor and has been complaining about it for years.
At a conference, a competitor to the current vendor overhears this and offers to take the
employee out to dinner to discuss their product offerings and how it could benefit the City. The
employee makes no commitment to change vendors, but hears the vendor out. After returning
from the conference, the employee receives a couple copper mugs and some specialty spirits
from the vendor’s hometown, and tells their supervisor what a great alternative the competitor
would be. What are the ethical considerations?
• Citations:
1. Sec. 2.03.520. Conflict of interest. No official or employee shall take or
influence official action if the official or employee has a financial or personal
interest in a transaction or matter with the city.
2. Sec. 2.03.490. Standards of conduct. Officials and employees shall
conduct themselves with propriety, discharge their duties impartially and fairly,
and make continuing efforts toward attaining and maintaining high standards of
conduct.
3. Sec. 2.03.540. Gifts, gratuities, and favors. Legislative intent. “… this
section ensures city employees are not influenced in the performance of their
work by outside persons or entities in a manner that entices the employee or
public officers to shift their commitment and dedication away from public service
to their own personal interests or the interests of an outside entity or person.”
A. No official or employee shall accept a gift, gratuity, or favor from any
person or entity:
i. That would tend improperly to influence a reasonable person in the
person's position to depart from the faithful and impartial discharge of the
person's public duties;
ii. That the person knows or that a reasonable person in that position
should know under the circumstances is primarily for the purpose of
rewarding the person for official action taken; or
iii. Has a value of $100.00 or more for an individual.
B. An employee or official may accept a gift, gratuity, or favor that has a
value greater than $25.00 but less than $100.00 for an individual only if such
gift, gratuity or favor:
i. Complies with 2.03.540.B.1 and 2; and
21
2025 Staff Ethics Curriculum
10 of 11
ii. Is provided incidental to and in conjunction with a public event
where the official or employee's attendance is in fulfillment of their
official duties.
• Follow-up questions for discussion:
1. Would there still be an ethical consideration, and if so what, if the
employee had separate meetings with all of the vendor’s competitors and
not just one competitor?
2. What would be some appropriate responses for the employee after
receiving the gift?
3. Follow-up: Would it be ok to accept if the employee filled out a gift
disclosure form?
➢ Disclosures statements are public record.
➢ Disclosure statements must be filed for items that have a value
greater than $25.00 but less than $100.00 for an individual only if
such gift, gratuity or favor:
i. Is not for the purpose of tending to improperly to influence
a reasonable person in the person's position to depart from
the faithful and impartial discharge of the person's public
duties, or that the person knows or that a reasonable
person in that position should know under the
circumstances is primarily for the purpose of rewarding the
person for official action taken; and
ii. Is provided incidental to and in conjunction with a public
event where the official or employee's attendance is in
fulfillment of their official duties.
22
2025 Staff Ethics Curriculum
11 of 11
Scenario 6:
A long-time City employee has received numerous complaints over the years about a specific
business in town. One day, the employee’s neighbor comes into the office stating they are
looking at using the known business and requests the employee’s opinion. The City employee
responds that their neighbor should avoid that business. They go on to say that their cousin
recently started their own business in the same specialty after spending months living on their
couch. The employee has no financial interest in their cousin’s business, so they felt confident in
sharing the business as an alternative for their neighbor. What are the ethical considerations?
• Citations:
1. Sec. 2.03.510. Treatment of the public. City officials and employees
represent the city government to the public. In their contact with the public,
officials and employees must bear in mind their role as public servants. Each
member of the public shall be treated courteously, impartially, and fairly. All
employees and officials shall, in the exercise of their official duties, refrain
from taking any action, making of any statement, or authoring any document
that is intended to harass, intimidate, or retaliate against any member of the
public.
2. Sec. 2.03.520. Conflict of interest. No official or employee shall take or
influence official action if the official or employee has a financial or personal
interest in a transaction or matter with the city. See also Sec. 2.03.470.
Definitions:
A. "Financial interest" means any ownership interest, contractual
relationship, business relationship, or other interest which will result in a
monetary or other material benefit to an official or employee, either
tangibly or intangibly, which has a value of more than $15.00, other than
the official or employee's duly authorized salary or compensation for the
official or employee's services to the city, and which interest is not
common to the interest of all other citizens of the city. The following
financial interest shall be imputed to be those of an official or an employee
of the city: that of a spouse or child of an official or employee; that of any
prime contractor or subcontractor of the city, in which the official or
employee or any member of the official or employee's immediate family
has any direct or indirect interest as the proprietor, by ownership of stock
or partnership interest.
i. "Immediate family" means spouse and children.
• Follow-up questions for discussion:
1. What if employee previously had an ownership interest in the business?
(discuss financial conflict of interest)
2. How is this, or is this not, “influencing official action” under the conflict of
interest provision?
23
Memorandum
REPORT TO:Board of Ethics
FROM:Mike Maas, City Clerk
Jen Giuttari, Assistant City Attorney
Greg Sullivan, City Attorney
SUBJECT:Review the City's Annual Boards' Ethics Training Curriculum
MEETING DATE:October 14, 2025
AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Administration
RECOMMENDATION:Consider the Motion: I move to approve the City's annual boards' ethics
training curriculum in accordance with the City's Charter.
STRATEGIC PLAN:1.2 Community Engagement: Broaden and deepen engagement of the
community in city government, innovating methods for inviting input from
the community and stakeholders.
BACKGROUND:For the City Commission and Citizen Boards, the City Clerks' Office has
created the included scenarios for the annual training. The City Clerks' Office
will arrange an item to be placed on an upcoming agenda to receive the
training.
The City of Bozeman will be utilizing the discussion format for board ethics
training. To create the curriculum, the City Clerks' Office with assistance
from the City Attorney's office, collaborated on issues or questions from the
Code of Ethics that generally align with questions that have arisen through
the last year surrounding Board operations. The goal is to make the material
more familiar by using scenarios similar to what arises. Engaging in
conversation helps everyone learn as a group and group discussion assists in
thinking of ethics holistically, rather than a lecture format that is one-way
presentation in a prescriptive manner.
UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None identified.
ALTERNATIVES:None suggested.
FISCAL EFFECTS:None
Attachments:
Ethics Scenarios with Answers.docx
Report compiled on: October 9, 2025
24
25
1. A member of the Tax Increment Financing Board owns a restaurant in a district and is very invested
in improving the district for both their business and Bozeman in general. They are diligent about filling
out their Financial Disclosure Form each year and notes the business and property interests on the
form. A developer recently brought before the board a proposal for a hotel in the adjacent unused
lot. The board member very excited about the hotel, as they had some conversations with the owners
and expects the two to share some parking facilities. The hotel will bring in customers for them. They
don’t mention this at the Board meeting because there is no direct business interest in the project,
and since their form is on file staff can bring it up if they think it’s a conflict. The board member
enthusiastically approves the hotel. What are the ethical considerations?
Main Issues:
Financial Interests and Disclosure – The board member should disclose their interests in the
project on the record (at the meeting). Section 6 of the City Code of Ethics states that officials
must discharge their duties impartially and fairly, and they certainly have financial interests
and have even made efforts to discuss such, so they are not acting impartially. Pursuant to
BMC 2.03.520, officials are not to use their position to secure any financial interest or
personal interest. They should disclose their interests and recuse themself from the vote.
Many boards require members with knowledge and investment in certain areas, so conflicts
are expected and should not be assumed uncommon. This is managed through thoughtful
disclosures and recusals when appropriate.
Financial Disclosure Form – While the Financial Disclosure Form is a public record, staff
members typically do not have direct access to these documents and will not necessarily
know of potential conflicts of board members. It is the responsibility of the board member
to recognize and disclose any potential conflicts on the record. Financial Disclosure Forms
are not required for all boards, so if a board has this requirement pursuant to BMC 2.03.550,
it has been determined board members are major financial decision makers and need to
take this requirement seriously.
2. An active member of the Urban Parks and Forestry Board and vehemently opposes a proposed change
to the Tree Maintenance District. The subject has been discussed at the board a number of times, and
while a few members agree with them, the majority of the board supports the changes to the district.
The board member feels like their voice isn’t being heard, so they submit a public comment to the
City Commission, and writes a letter to the Chronicle expressing their concerns about the district,
acknowledging the experience with the project given their membership on the UPF Board. They make
sure to include “on behalf of UPF” in the letters to reinforce their legitimate opinion and so that others
will take their opinion seriously. What are the ethical considerations?
Main Issues:
Representation as an Individual – BMC 2.03.470.A.9 classifies board members as “officials”
as they are appointed by the City Commission. Board members are appointed by the City
Commission to advise the City Commission. All City officials must act within the course and
scope of their position and must act on behalf of the municipality. City Commission liaisons
sit on almost every board and hear conflicting viewpoints during meetings. Voicing their
26
concerns to the board and City Commission is appropriate, but the member goes further by
writing to the Chronicle, as they are no longer acting on behalf of the municipality but
instead on their own interests. They can absolutely do this as a private citizen, but using
their position as advocacy of their own interests is not appropriate.
Representation as the Board – Board members (and all officials and staff for that matter)
have free speech rights and can express opinions as private citizens. However, individual
members cannot write “on behalf of UPF” on any of their communications unless said
communications were expressly approved by the board at a public meeting. They do not
speak on behalf of the board unless given that permission, and should not represent
themself as such. Resolution 5323 – “one body, one voice”
3. The Chair of the Downtown Urban Renewal Board handles setting the agendas. They also own a hotel
in the district. Recently the agendas have been pretty full of new activity in the district, so they want
to prioritize retail and food service projects as they view that as a gap to fill with new development.
A proposed hotel has asked the board to be considered for financial in incentives. The Chair knows
that this level of request needs to be approved by the DURD and does not go before the City
Commission but doesn’t want to put it on an agenda as their hotel is covering the needs of the district
at the moment. They didn’t get any incentives when building their hotel, so if they are in a time crunch
they can proceed without the incentives. The Chair informed the applicant the board is focusing on
other priorities and that the request will not be considered at this time. What are the ethical
considerations?
Main Issues:
Misuse of Position – Pursuant to MCA 2-2-105.5, a public official may not perform an official
act directly and substantially affecting a business or other undertaking to its economic
detriment when the official or employee has a substantial personal interest in a competing
firm or undertaking. While the chair has the authority to set the agenda, they have already
made the call that the new hotel doesn’t need the incentives at this time, which they then
use to justify keeping the item off the agenda. They may even be retaliating against the new
applicant if the Chair views it unfair that this person could get incentives they didn’t. The
definition of “improper governmental action” in BMC 2.03.470.8 includes action taken by
an official that is intended to retaliate against a member of the public. If the new applicant
chooses to come back later when he can get the incentives, the actions of the Chair have
directly resulting in delaying a project, which will lead to less competition for them. The
Chair needs to act on behalf of the City in this decision.
Financial Interest – Pursuant to BMC 2.03.470.6, “financial interest” does not need to be
tangible. Regardless of whether the Chair is intentionally creating a barrier for the new
hotel, if the hotel is delayed due to their actions, they stand to keep business that the new
hotel may have taken away. They need to be aware of this level of financial interest, and
even if motivations are in the right place, the perception of a conflict may still exist. They
need to take this into account in their decision making when setting the agenda.
27
4. A member of the Community Development Board also works for a local non-profit that helps to
coordinate placement of low-income individuals in affordable housing. They are happy that their
involvement on the board can help facilitate a community need their job also addresses. Since they
are an expert in the area, they make sure that developers coming before the CDB are fully aware of
the different resources in the community and gets frustrated when someone asks for an incentive
when they haven’t gone through all the steps to minimize development costs. They vote no on these
projects since there are so many local organizations that could also benefit from a developer utilizing
their resources and only votes yes on projects that maximize these resources. What are the ethical
considerations?
Main Issues:
Financial Interest – Again, pursuant to BMC 2.03.470.6, “financial interest” does not need
to be tangible. While the board member may have good intentions, they are using their
position to build up business for local non-profits, which benefits their directly in job security
and community relationships. This is just not the role of a board member, who as a city
official needs to put on a different hat to advise the City Commission and act on behalf of
the municipality.
Impartiality – Section 6 of the Ethics Handbook states that officials must “discharge their
duties impartially and fairly.” As a decision-maker all board members must consider the
information before them with each application, and not apply standards not expressly given
to her by law.
5. The Transportation Board is working to coordinate an expansion to the downtown parking garage.
This week the Board is considering the construction contract for the garage, which includes as a sub-
contractor an architecture firm for which a member of the board’s daughter works. The member
wasn’t sure if approving the contract would show favoritism to a relative, so they emailed the Chair
of the Board to let them know of the relationship. The chair thanked the member for letting them
know. When the Board got to the item the member did not disclose the conflict since they already
did; since the relation was once-removed from the contract before them, they voted to approve the
contract. What are the ethical considerations?
Main Issues:
Disclosure – Pursuant to BMC 2.03.520.D.1, disclosure must be on the record. It is a board
member’s responsibility to disclose the conflict at the public meeting. Knowing of the
conflict, the chair should also bring it up since the member failed to do so.
Nepotism – MCA 2-2-201 states officials are not to have interest in contracts if they are
directly involved, defined as a person who directly monitors, extends, amends, audits, or is
responsible for procurement of the contract, of which the member certainly is. Whether
their daughter is a sub-contractor is irrelevant as she may directly stand to benefit from this
contract if approved. If a member knows their relation will or may work on this project they
should disclose that and recuse themself from the vote. If the board member knows their
28
daughter will NOT work on that project, they should still disclose that information prior to
the vote to avoid any misperceptions of favoritism later down the road.
SUMMARY: These are complicated scenarios, and there can be fine lines between disclosing vs.
recusing, speaking as an individual vs. board member, etc. There may also be more nuanced ethical
issues with any of these scenarios, so only the main ones are highlighted. But these situations come up
frequently, so please never hesitate to contact the City Attorney’s office for assistance prior to any
decision-making.
29
Memorandum
REPORT TO:Board of Ethics
SUBJECT:Review and Discuss the Board of Ethics Workplan and Schedule Future
Meetings
MEETING DATE:October 14, 2025
AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Citizen Advisory Board/Commission
RECOMMENDATION:Review and Discuss the Board of Ethics Workplan and Schedule Future
Meetings
30