Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-04-25 Study Commission Agenda and Packet MaterialsA. Call to Order with Pledge of Allegiance and Moment of Silence - 4:00 PM, Commission Room, City Hall, 121 North Rouse B. Changes to the Agenda C. Public Comment on Anything within the Jurisdiction of the Study Commission THE STUDY COMMISSION OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA SC AGENDA Thursday, December 4, 2025 How to Participate: If you are interested in commenting in writing on items on the agenda please send an email to govreview@bozeman.net prior to 12:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting. At the direction of the Study Commission, anonymous public comments are not distributed to the Study Commission. Public comments will also be accepted in-person and through video conference during the appropriate agenda items but you may only comment once per item. As always, the meeting will be recorded and streamed through the Meeting Videos and available in the City on cable channel 190. For more information please contact Ex Officio, Mike Maas, 406.582.2321, or visit bozemanstudy.com. 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 +1 669 900 9128 Access code: 951 6442 0347 This is the time to comment on any matter falling within the scope of the Bozeman Study 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 per topic. Please note, the Study Commission cannot take action on any item which does not appear on the agenda. All persons addressing the Study Commission 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 and limit your 1 D. Consent Agenda D.1 Approval of Study Commission Minutes(Heinen) E. Correspondence or Study Commission Update E.1 Outreach Reports(Heinen) F. Unfinished Business G. New Business G.1 Report from Working Ventures (Franks/Odenthal) G.2 Identification of Bozeman City Study Commission's Legal Advisor (Heinen) G.3 Transition from Study Plan of Action into in depth research areas (Heinen) G.4 Request the Montana State University Local Government Center complete research for Bozeman City Study Commission(Heinen/Franks/Campbell ) H. Future Agenda Items H.1 Potential Meeting topics(Heinen) I. Public Comment on Anything within the Jurisdiction of the Study Commission J. Announcements K. Adjournment comments to three minutes. Written comments can be located in the Public Comment Repository. Consider the Motion: I move to approve the Study Commission meeting minutes from November 6th and November 19th 2025. Consider the Motion: I move to appoint ____ as the Bozeman City Study Commission's Legal Advisor. Consider the Motion: I move to request the Montana State University Local Government Center to conduct research on behalf of the Bozeman City Study Commission. This item is a living list of potential future meeting topics. Reference Materials Study Commission Bylaws Study Commission Resources Study Commission meetings are open to all members of the public. If you have a disability that requires assistance, please contact the City of Bozeman's ADA Coordinator, David Arnado, at 406.582.3232. Study Commission meetings are televised live on cable channel 190 and streamed live on our Meeting Videos Page. 2 3 Memorandum REPORT TO:Study Commission FROM:Caeleb Heinen, Recording Secretary Mike Maas, Ex Officio SUBJECT:Approval of Study Commission Minutes MEETING DATE:December 4, 2025 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Citizen Advisory Board/Commission RECOMMENDATION:Consider the Motion: I move to approve the Study Commission meeting minutes from November 6th and November 19th 2025. STRATEGIC PLAN:1.1 Outreach: Continue to strengthen and innovate in how we deliver information to the community and our partners. BACKGROUND:Attached are the written minute summaries from the previous two meetings. Future meeting minutes ought to be approved at the next schedule Study Commission meeting. All past meeting recordings are available for review on the City's Meeting Videos page. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None identified ALTERNATIVES:As per the Study Commission FISCAL EFFECTS:None Attachments: 11-06-25 Study Commission Meeting Minutes.pdf 11-19-25 Study Commission Meeting Minutes.pdf Report compiled on: November 13, 2025 4 Bozeman City Commission Meeting Minutes, November 6, 2025 Page 1 of 7 THE CITY COMMMISSION MEETING OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA MINUTES November 6, 2025 A) 00:05:25 Call to Order with Pledge of Allegiance and Moment of Silence - 4:00 PM, Commission Room, City Hall, 121 North Rouse Present: Carson Taylor, Becky Franks, Deanna Campbell, Jan Strout, Mike Maas Absent: None Excused: Barb Cestero B) 00:07:01 Changes to the Agenda 00:07:06 Chairman Carson Taylor proposed to move item G.1 to follow E.1 and report by Working Ventures at the end of the Agenda 00:08:24 Ex-Officio Mike Maas proposed to excuse Commissioner Barb Cestero's absence 00:08:43 Motion to approve I make a motion to excuse Commissioner Cestero who previously let us know that she was not able to attend. Becky Franks: Motion Jan Strout: 2nd 00:09:14 Vote on the Motion to approve I make a motion to excuse Commissioner Cestero who previously let us know that she was not able to attend. The Motion carried 4 - 0. Approve: Carson Taylor Becky Franks Deanna Campbell Jan Strout 5 Bozeman City Commission Meeting Minutes, November 6, 2025 Page 2 of 7 Disapprove: None C) 00:09:28 Public Comment on Anything within the Jurisdiction of the Study Commission D) 00:12:07 Consent Agenda D.1 00:12:18 Approval of Study Commission Minutes 10-15-25 Study Commission Meeting Minutes.docx 00:12:35 Motion to approve I move to approve the Study Commission meeting minutes from October 15th, 2025. Becky Franks: Motion Jan Strout: 2nd 00:12:54 Vote on the Motion to approve I move to approve the Study Commission meeting minutes from October 15th, 2025. The Motion carried 4 - 0. Approve: Carson Taylor Becky Franks Deanna Campbell Jan Strout Disapprove: None E) 00:13:08 Correspondence or Study Commission Update E.1 00:13:13 Outreach Reports Summary of Work Session with City Commission 00:13:24 Commissioner Deanna Campbell discussed attendance with Commissioner Jan Strout at the event held at the Senior Center. 00:14:18 Commissioner Jan Strout discussed her promotion of the Study Commission surveys at her attendance at Community wide events, her presentation at the MSU Women's Center and the survey as part of her Neighborhood Association. 00:16:32 Commissioner Becky Franks discussed her correspondence with 106.9 Eagle Radio with Commissioner Carson Taylor to promote the survey. 00:17:22 Commissioner Carson Taylor discussed his attendance on 106.9 Eagle Radio, his correspondence with MSU's Student Newspaper Exponent, his interview with PBS, his attendance with 6 Bozeman City Commission Meeting Minutes, November 6, 2025 Page 3 of 7 Commissioner Barb Cestero at Neighborhood Council NENA, attendance at Gallatin County Study Commission Meeting, and his position on Commissioner Deanna Campbell's Op-Ed. 00:28:51 Discussion on engagement with community members and transparency of role as Study Commissioners. 00:31:26 Ex Officio Mike Maas discussed his correspondence with the Bozeman Chronicle and ad run for the Survey, and the City's communication with The Exponent. Gallatin County Study Commission Bozeman Listening Session: Thursday Nov 20 public library 6pm G) 00:41:31 New Business G.1 00:41:35 Amend the Bylaws of the Bozeman City Study Commission Bylaws City of Bozeman Study Commission Suggested Edits 11 6 25.pdf 00:41:56 Motion to approve I would like to move that we postpone this item indefinitely. Deanna Campbell: Motion Failed for a lack of second 00:43:28 Ex Officio Mike Maas discussed procedure and explanation of language on the written motion. 00:44:32 Commissioner Becky Franks summarized and introduced the amendment to the bylaws. 00:47:03 Motion to approve I would like to make a motion to add these Section 3.04 to the bylaws. Becky Franks: Motion Jan Strout: 2nd 00:47:20 Discussion on the motion presented by Commissioner Becky Franks 00:47:48 Motion to amend I move to amend the proposed addition of Section 3.04 External Communication by retaining clauses 1 and 3, 1 is the alignment with the City's Code of Conduct and 3 is the personal disclaimer language "the views here expressed are mine only," and delete the two Commissioner requirement and the pre and post reporting requirements. Deanna Campbell: Motion Carson Taylor: 2nd 00:48:29 Discussion on the procedure of an amended motion 00:50:21 Roger Blank gave public comment 7 Bozeman City Commission Meeting Minutes, November 6, 2025 Page 4 of 7 00:53:35 Jena Reno gave public comment 00:55:21 Hillary gave public comment 00:57:44 Emily Talago gave public comment 01:00:27 Kate Burnaby Wright gave public comment 01:03:09 Discussion on proposed amendment 01:06:38 Commissioner Carson Taylor provided potential language changes to Commissioner Becky Frank's original motion 01:10:37 Vote on the Motion to amend I move to amend the proposed addition of Section 3.04 External Communication by retaining clauses 1 and 3, 1 is the alignment with the City's Code of Conduct and 3 is the personal disclaimer language "the views here expressed are mine only," and delete the two Commissioner requirement and the pre and post reporting requirements. The Motion failed 1 - 3. Approve: Deanna Campbell Disapprove: Carson Taylor Becky Franks Jan Strout 01:11:30 Motion to continue I make a motion to continue to November 19th with a redraft from Carson and Becky Becky Franks: Motion Jan Strout: 2nd 01:12:27 Hillary gave public comment 01:13:13 Vote on the Motion to continue I make a motion to continue to November 19th with a redraft from Carson and Becky The Motion carried 4 - 0. Approve: Carson Taylor Becky Franks Deanna Campbell Jan Strout Disapprove: None G.2 01:13:35 Presentation on City Values, Human Rights, and Quality of Life 8 Bozeman City Commission Meeting Minutes, November 6, 2025 Page 5 of 7 Bozeman Strategic Plan Vision and Vision Statements.pdf 01:13:47 Commissioner Jan Strout summarized agenda item and introduced Professor Franke Wilmer 01:17:59 Professor Franke Wilmer presented: Human Rights: Montana's Constitution, Code of Law, and the Bozeman City Charter The Constitution of the State of Montana Article II Section 33 Montana Code Annotated 2023 (1) Montana Code Annotated 2023 (2) Montana Human Rights Act City Code Part I - Charter Bozeman City Charter and Code Part I, Article IV Montana Human Rights Bureau Franke Wilmer’s Presentation 01:34:46 Questions from Commissioners for Professor Franke Wilmer 01:56:21 Roger Blank gave public comment 01:57:50 Ex Officio Mike Maas gave an explanation to the Online MCA references in the Bozeman City Charter 01:59:01 Commissioner Carson Taylor presented: Belonging to Bozeman Plan Belonging to Bozeman Plan 02:02:42 Ex Officio Mike Maas provided clarifying comments on the Strategic Plan 02:05:16 Questions from Commissioners for Commissioner Carson Taylor 02:06:51 Hillary gave public comment F) 02:08:28 Unfinished Business F.1 02:08:34 Report by Working Ventures BSC - November Meeting.pdf 02:10:22 Stan Odenthal from Working Ventures Presented: Community Engagement Update Phase 3 Update: Stakeholder Meetings Commissioner Survey and Schedule 9 Bozeman City Commission Meeting Minutes, November 6, 2025 Page 6 of 7 Sample Schedule (December 4th-6th) 02:22:32 Discussion on the groups for December 4-6 and scheduling 02:37:27 Discussion on formatting of engagement events and messaging 02:47:45 Commissioner Becky Frank summarized points on switching December events to zoom, providing education, making a big event on the release of survey results and having dedicated events in January 02:48:35 Suggestion to do an outreach event at February's PechaKucha event 02:51:08 Ana Lopez Shalla from Working Ventures Presented: Additional Research Needs 02:52:56 Discussion on Working Ventures research needs, responsibilities and funding Present: Carson Taylor, Deanna Campbell, Jan Strout, Mike Maas Absent: None Excused: Barb Cestero, Becky Franks 02:56:42 Jena Reno gave public comment 02:59:15 Roger Blank gave public comment 03:04:08 Emily Talago gave public comment 03:05:04 Working Ventures Ana Lopez discussed contract specifics and work load H) 03:07:57 Future Agenda Items H.1 Potential Meeting topics 03:08:00 Deanna Campbell request to include Jeremy Johnson on Human Rights Conversation in future meeting and a request to clarify who proposed Working Ventures with Research Funding 03:11:06 Ex Officio Mike Maas to follow up on specifics for November 19 agenda with Commissioner Carson Taylor and Commissioner Becky Franks I) 03:11:08 Public Comment on Anything within the Jurisdiction of the Study Commission 03:11:10 Hillary gave public comment 03:11:47 Ex Officio Mike Maas clarified on hours based contract with Working Ventures J) Announcements 10 Bozeman City Commission Meeting Minutes, November 6, 2025 Page 7 of 7 K) 03:12:18 Adjournment 11 Bozeman City Commission Meeting Minutes, November 19th, 2025 Page 1 of 6 THE CITY COMMMISSION MEETING OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA MINUTES November 19th, 2025 A) 00:00:38 Call to Order with Pledge of Allegiance and Moment of Silence - 4:00 PM, Commission Room, City Hall, 121 North Rouse Present: Carson Taylor, Becky Franks, Barb Cestero, Deanna Campbell, Jan Strout, Mike Maas Absent: None Excused: None B) 00:02:15 Changes to the Agenda C) 00:02:20 Public Comment on Anything within the Jurisdiction of the Study Commission 00:03:30 Sandra Rowe gave public comment D) 00:05:13 Consent Agenda D.1 00:05:29 Approval of Study Commission Minutes 00:05:40 Clarification on the Minutes for approval D.2 00:06:59 Study Commission Claims Review and Approval BCSC Invoice 2 (October 2025) - Invoice (1).pdf 00:07:09 Chairman Carson Taylor pulled D.2 for discussion 00:07:38 Discussion on the itemization of the invoices from Working Ventures 00:10:05 Motion to approve I move to approve payment of claims as presented. Becky Franks: Motion Barb Cestero: 2nd 12 Bozeman City Commission Meeting Minutes, November 19th, 2025 Page 2 of 6 00:10:28 Vote on the Motion to approve I move to approve payment of claims as presented. The Motion carried 5 - 0. Approve: Carson Taylor Becky Franks Barb Cestero Deanna Campbell Jan Strout Disapprove: None E) 00:10:42 Correspondence or Study Commission Update E.1 00:10:44 Outreach Reports 00:10:44 Commissioner Carson Taylor discussed the airing of a PBS interview he did previously 00:12:00 Commissioner Deanna Campbell discussed an email received from Commissioner Jan Strout relating to an interview with Gallatin Sentinel 00:12:41 Commissioner Deanna Campbell issued a formal complaint to Commissioner Jan Strout for a violation of Montana Open Meetings Law (MCA 2-203) 00:14:07 Commissioner Deanna Campbell discussed the request from Working Ventures for Research Funding with a request that no Commissioner may represent themselves as speaking for or directing the actions of the full Commission without a public vote and formal authorization 00:16:08 Commissioner Becky Franks discussed the conversation with Working Ventures that brought forth the Research Funding Request 00:17:00 Further discussion on the request for Research by Working Ventures 00:19:00 Commissioner Jan Strout read her email regarding the Gallatin Sentinel out loud 00:20:33 Ex Officio Mike Maas clarified Open Meeting statutes 00:21:04 Further discussion on the Open Meeting Statutes and Commissioner Jan Strout's email 00:26:36 Commissioner Jan Strout discussed her outreach to the public media, including request for outreach at PechaKucha February 18 and 19th F) 00:28:04 New Business F.1 00:28:09 Participate in the City of Bozeman's Ethics Training Ethics Handbook version 4 May 2025.pdf 00:28:49 City Attorney Greg Sullivan presented: 13 Bozeman City Commission Meeting Minutes, November 19th, 2025 Page 3 of 6 Bozeman's Ethics Program Sec. 7.01. - Conflicts of Interest; Board of Ethics Charter Ethics Code Policy (2.03.460) Board of Ethics Ethics Code Financial Disclosures Charter Influence Beyond Code Ethics Handbook Bozeman's Ethics Program (2) State Law 2025 Training 00:51:44 Questions for City Attorney Greg Sullivan on Ethics Training and Open Meeting Statutes Montana Code Annotated 2023: 2-3-202 2-3-221 01:03:38 Study Commissioners participated in Bozeman's Ethics Training for Advisory Boards and City Commission Code of Ethics 01:06:02 Ethics training included discussions on the ethics program, presentation and discussing specific scenarios 01:15:38 City Attorney Greg Sullivan discussed the scenario as the Charter Provision in action G) 01:32:00 Unfinished Business G.1 01:32:03 Amend the Bylaws of the Bozeman City Study Commission Bylaws City of Bozeman Study Commission Suggested Edits 11 19 25.pdf 01:32:12 Commissioner Carson Taylor discussed the changed language for the proposed amended Bylaws 01:34:56 Commissioner Barb Cestero's suggested language edit for Section 3.04 #5 01:35:24 Discussion on the proposed amendment and its language 01:36:28 Ex Officio Mike Maas read out loud the proposed changes to the amendment suggested by Commissioner Jan Strout 01:37:16 Motion to approve I move to have an outside Constitutional attorney review this before adoption 14 Bozeman City Commission Meeting Minutes, November 19th, 2025 Page 4 of 6 Deanna Campbell: Motion Motion failed due to a lack of second 01:39:27 Commissioner Deanna Campbell objected to taking action on the proposed bylaw amendment before Constitutional concerns were addressed 01:40:07 Motion to amend I move to change the resulting text to section 3.04 External Communications if my amendment were adopted would read: Deanna Campbell: Motion Barb Cestero: 2nd Resulting Text of Section 3.04 – External Communications (If Amendment Adopted) Section 3.04. External Communications 1. Adherence to Code of Conduct Commissioners shall adhere to the Bozeman City Code of Conduct and Decorum, as stated in Bozeman City Ordinance 2157, when engaging in external communication 2. Communication as Private Individuals When addressing issues outside the scope of responsibility of the Study Commission, commissioners may speak, write, or present as private individuals. In such cases, commissioners must include a clear disclaimer that the views expressed are their own and do not represent the position of the Study Commission. 3. Representation of Commission Positions Commissioners shall not imply, state, or represent that they speak on behalf of the Study Commission unless the Commission has formally authorized such representation through a vote. 01:43:13 Discussion on the proposed motion to amend 01:51:08 Hillary gave public comment 01:54:32 Jena Rena gave public comment 01:55:32 Further discussion on the proposed motion to amend 01:57:55 Vote on the Motion to amend I move to change the resulting text to section 3.04 External Communications if my amendment were adopted would read: The Motion failed 1 - 4. Approve: Deanna Campbell Disapprove: Carson Taylor Becky Franks Barb Cestero Jan Strout 15 Bozeman City Commission Meeting Minutes, November 19th, 2025 Page 5 of 6 01:58:17 Motion to approve I so move the adoption in the agenda External Communications Section 3.04 to our bylaws of the Study Commission, including the language edits as presented Jan Strout: Motion Becky Franks: 2nd 02:01:11 Discussion on the proposed motion 02:06:10 Ex Officio Mike Maas provided clarification on State Statute 7-3-172: Purpose of Study Commission and 7-3-185: Scope of Study Commission Recommendations Montana Code Annotated: 7-3-172 7-3-185 02:16:24 Vote on the Motion to approve I so move the adoption in the agenda External Communications Section 3.04 to our bylaws of the Study Commission, including the language edits as presented The Motion carried 4 - 1. Approve: Carson Taylor Becky Franks Barb Cestero Jan Strout Disapprove: Deanna Campbell G.2 02:16:47 Report on Working Ventures Schedule 02:16:57 Commissioner Deanna Campbell noted that her concern that the communication issue which affected public trust and transparency remains unaddressed by this bylaw 02:17:29 Commissioner Becky Franks moved the Working Ventures report to the December 4th meeting agenda 02:18:19 Commissioner Becky Franks clarified that there will be no additional research provided by Working Ventures H) 02:19:01 Future Agenda Items H.1 02:19:24 Study Plan of Action for December 4 02:19:26 Discussion on December 4th meeting and a vague timeline for the Study Commission through 2025 02:25:24 December 4th agenda to include: 16 Bozeman City Commission Meeting Minutes, November 19th, 2025 Page 6 of 6 Report from Working Ventures Approach City Attorney Greg Sullivan to provide legal advice Discussion on moving from Study Plan to a deep dive timeline for an eventual recommendation Request to approach MSU Government Center to provide research 02:31:00 Discussion on scheduling a meeting on December 17th 02:37:07 Ex Officio Mike Maas to publish Commissioner Barb Cestero's Study Guide on Scope of Recommendation 02:38:04 Commissioner Jan Strout to look into logistics of PechaKucha H.2 Potential Meeting topics I) 02:39:30 Public Comment on Anything within the Jurisdiction of the Study Commission J) Announcements K) 02:39:50 Adjournment 17 Memorandum REPORT TO:Study Commission FROM:Caeleb Heinen, Recording Secretary Mike Maas, Ex Officio SUBJECT:Outreach Reports MEETING DATE:December 4, 2025 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Citizen Advisory Board/Commission RECOMMENDATION:This is the time for Study Commissioners to report personal outreach since the last meeting. STRATEGIC PLAN:1.1 Outreach: Continue to strengthen and innovate in how we deliver information to the community and our partners. BACKGROUND:This is the time for Study Commissioners to report personal outreach since the last meeting. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None identified ALTERNATIVES:As per the Study Commission FISCAL EFFECTS:TBD Report compiled on: November 24, 2025 18 Memorandum REPORT TO:Study Commission FROM:Caeleb Heinen, Recording Secretary Mike Maas, Ex Officio Becky Franks, Vice-chair City Study Commission Working Ventures, Communication Strategist Firm SUBJECT:Report from Working Ventures MEETING DATE:December 4, 2025 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Citizen Advisory Board/Commission RECOMMENDATION:Working Ventures will report on the compiled results and data from the Bozeman City Study Commission's first public outreach survey. This will include a presentation on analysis and quantitative results. They will also introduce a new survey for Bozeman City Employees and begin to collaborate on content, questions and focus. 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:Report and input from Working Ventures on survey collection. This includes both the results of the first public outreach survey and the implementation of a new Bozeman City Employee survey. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None identified ALTERNATIVES:As per the City Study Commission FISCAL EFFECTS:TBD Attachments: WV - December Agenda Items.pdf Report compiled on: November 13, 2025 19 | PUBLIC ELECTION OF STUDY COMMISSION BROAD FEEDBACK ON CHARTER TOPICS NARROW FOCUS TO INTEREST AREAS EDUCATION & INPUT ON INTEREST AREAS DRAFT UPDATED CHARTER LANGUAGE PUBLIC VOTE TO APPROVE UPDATED CHARTER Summarizing the broad feedback strategies listed above, the four topics below emerged as the greatest interest areas for future change through charter updates. These areas should be the focus of deeper education and input over the next months leading to potential drafted charter language. Hybrid Geographic District+ At-Large Representation in City Commission Clarified Relationships among City Commission, City Boards, and Neighborhood Councils 555 participants completed the public survey online or on paper. Working Ventures will present detailed findings in these areas at the DECEMBER 4 MEETING:th Perceptions of Current State Future Leadership Goals Mayor & City Manager Feedback City Commission Feedback Advisory Boards & Neighborhood Councils Feedback Demographic Profile City Residents (5)Outside City in Gallatin Valley (5) Non-Residents Excluded from Analyses (5) DECEMBER OVERVIEW 1 The City of Bozeman Study Commission has partnered with Working Ventures to engage the public & explore the structure of our local government. To gather broad feedback, the Commission has: Held 20 public study commission meetings Invited # subject matter experts to present best practices Reviewed charters from # comparison cities Designed and promoted a public survey Held 3 public stakeholder meetings Canvassed downtown Bozeman Distributed paper surveys at the Senior Center Communicated engagement efforts to public groups and personal contacts Surveyed Study Commissioners on priorities Now, we continue narrowing focus towards a set of recommended updates to the City Charter. PROCESS UPDATE SURVEY RESULTS OVERVIEW PROCESS OVERVIEW NARROWED INTEREST AREAS Distributed Powers Between Mayor and City Manager Altered Deputy Mayor Policy 20 | The survey will be created in Monday.com and distributed through a variety of channels to get a high percentage of engagement. City of Bozeman email to all employees encouraging participation Reminder emails sent at various intervals How well do you feel the current structure of Bozeman’s local government supports efficient delivery of services in your department? (Scale 1-5) Do you feel that Bozeman’s current organizational structure enables clear roles, responsibilities, and reporting lines? (Scale 1-5) How effective are internal communication channels (e.g., updates, directives, policies) within your department? (Scale 1-5) How clearly do you feel the City Manager’s Office communicates priorities, expectations, and directives that affect your day-to-day work? (Scale 1-5) What changes (structural, procedural, or cultural) would most improve efficiency in City operations? (Open-ended) How effectively do you feel the City Commission’s policy decisions align with operational realities faced by staff in delivering services? (Scale 1-5) CITY EMPLOYEE SURVEY 2 Assess perceived efficiency of current local government structures, processes, and workflows from the perspective of City of Bozeman employees. Identify structural or organizational barriers that slow down service delivery or hinder interdepartmental collaboration. Understand employee experiences with operating procedures, communication channels, and decision- making authority within the existing structure. Evaluate opportunities for modernization through improved governance structures, technology, or resource allocation. Gather recommendations from frontline staff who directly experience how structure affects service delivery. Examine alignment between current resources and service expectations for Bozeman’s rapidly growing community. Benchmark internal perceptions of government efficiency to complement public-facing research and external data sources. GOALS SAMPLE EMPLOYEE SURVEY QUESTIONS SURVEY DISTRIBUTION QR code posted in the building, break rooms, and common areas Briefing toolkit for teams and ability to participate/discuss survey in all staff meeting(s) 21 Memorandum REPORT TO:Study Commission FROM:Caeleb Heinen, Recording Secretary Mike Maas, Ex Officio SUBJECT:Identification of Bozeman City Study Commission's Legal Advisor MEETING DATE:December 4, 2025 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Citizen Advisory Board/Commission RECOMMENDATION:Consider the Motion: I move to appoint ____ as the Bozeman City Study Commission's Legal Advisor. STRATEGIC PLAN:1.1 Outreach: Continue to strengthen and innovate in how we deliver information to the community and our partners. BACKGROUND:The Study Commissioners will have this time to decide on a Legal Advisor. This role will advise on legal matters pertaining to the Bozeman Study Commission and drafting language for ballot initiatives. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None identified ALTERNATIVES:As per the Commission FISCAL EFFECTS:TBD Report compiled on: November 24, 2025 22 Memorandum REPORT TO:Study Commission FROM:Caeleb Heinen, Recording Secretary Mike Maas, Ex Officio SUBJECT:Transition from Study Plan of Action into in depth research areas MEETING DATE:December 4, 2025 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Citizen Advisory Board/Commission RECOMMENDATION:The Bozeman City Study Commission will be transitioning from their Study Plan of Action into in depth analysis and research of key areas of interest. This will include creating a set timeline to establish the necessary meetings to accomplish the in depth analysis, as well as establish the key areas of interest the Bozeman City Study Commission will focus on. Each of those areas may be established through consensus or voting. STRATEGIC PLAN:1.1 Outreach: Continue to strengthen and innovate in how we deliver information to the community and our partners. BACKGROUND:The Bozeman City Study Commission will be transitioning from their Study Plan of Action into in depth analysis and research of key areas of interest. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None identified ALTERNATIVES:As per the Commission FISCAL EFFECTS:TBD Attachments: Unit 6 – Crossing the Finish Line.pdf Report compiled on: November 24, 2025 23 The Montana State University Extension Service is an ADA/EO/AA/Veteran’s Preference Employer and Provider of Educational Outreach. LOCAL GOVERNMENT REVIEW STUDY COMMISSION GUIDE UNIT 6: THANK GOODNESS THAT'S OVER! CONCLUDING THE REVIEW & CROSSING THE FINISH LINE In our concluding unit, we’ll look at each of the major components of the tentative and final reports, statutory requirements for report writing, additional reports and certificates potentially necessary to include, guidelines for preparing minority and supplementary reports, election requirements if your commission recommends change for the voters to decide on, and considerations for developing a transition advisory plan if voters adopt the recommended changes. We’ll also look at suggestions for structuring and organizing the final report and content to include. We have included examples you can use as models for the final, minority, and supplemental reports and the various certificates required if recommending change. Learning Outcomes: 1. Understand the purpose of the final report and the content requirements depending on whether your study commission recommends change or not. 2. Deepen your understanding of the type of information to collect through the review based on the potential outputs required of your study commission. 3. Know the various deadlines for the conclusion of the process and understand the different contingencies in which they may be applicable. 24 2 What are the Tentative and Final Reports? (7-3-187 through 191, MCA) The final report, and tentative report, which functions as a final report rough draft, is a record of your commission's activities. It explains what you discovered and the conclusions and recommendations you’ve made based on that discovery. It provides a rationale for change if change is recommended. And it will become part of the historic record of your jurisdiction, explaining to future generations what their local government was like at the time you conducted the review. It’s the basic document for educating the citizens about their local government and it’s your study commission's most effective means of communicating the details of your work and recommendations to the voters. Up to the time of the report's preparation many people will know little about the study commission. The report will help both citizens and the news media to understand the meaning of the Voter Review process in their area. The final report may be some voters' only source of local government review information prior to election day. Since it is your study commission’s most effective method of communicating with the electorate, your commission needs to ensure it clearly and effectively explains what voters need to know. The final report should contain the items required by state statute and enough explanation to give readers who haven't followed the review closely a clear idea of what was done, why it was done, who did it, and the reasons for reaching your conclusions and recommendations. It’s a great opportunity for your study commission to summarize the relevant information you gathered from interviews, research, hearings, and local citizen surveys. If you’re interested in reviewing final reports from past cycles, the MSU Local Government Center has copies of many of those final reports. Your local government may have copies of past cycle reports, and copies submitted by previous study commissions may also be available in your local library. 25 3 An Overview of the Tentative and Final Report Requirements Most of your study commission’s major deadlines and deliverables revolve around the tentative and final reports. The timetable your study commission establishes is your guide to the big deadlines, but the required elements of the tentative and final reports, as well as specific potential wrap-up deadlines, are more detailed and specific. We’ll refer to the timetable for the big milestones, but we’ll get into the details of timeframes, dates, requirements, and components of the reports in this unit. As a refresher, the minimum timetable requirements include: 1. Conduct one or more public hearings to hear what the public has to say about the current form, functions, and problems of the local government. 2. Write and distribute a tentative report containing the same categories of information required in the final report. 3. Conduct one or more public hearings to hear the community’s responses and feedback to the tentative report. 4. Adopt and distribute the final report, set the date for an election on the question of adopting a new plan of government if your study commission recommends an alternate form, or, if your study commission does not recommend any change, publish and distribute the final report within 60 days of your commission’s adoption of the final report (7-3-186, MCA). By the time you start writing the tentative report, you’ll have had time and opportunity to collect a great deal of information, conduct interviews, and research the current and alternative forms. Prior to the approval of the tentative report, your study commission must hold at least one public hearing for the purpose of gathering information regarding the current form, functions, and problems of local government. Your commission then has the responsibility of formulating, reproducing, and distributing the tentative report. You’ll need to have a clear idea of what recommendations your study commission may want to make as those recommendations, or lack thereof, will dictate what the reports contain and how you proceed with the rest of the process. After you’ve held at least one public hearing to hear community responses to the tentative report, your study commission will need to formally adopt the final report. Adoption is the catalyst for the rest of the process, all of which is contingent on what your commission recommends. The date of final report adoption is the metric for gauging what additional steps must happen and when. If your commission recommends change, you need to decide which election date works best to submit the question of adopting a new plan of government to the voters. Bear in mind that the election must be held within 120 days of the adoption of the final report. If your study commission recommends change to the voters, you’ll need to calculate from the election date you’ve chosen to make sure it’s within that 120-day time limit between adoption and election. You’ll also need to prepare enough copies of the final report for public distribution and make it available to the electors no later than 30 days prior to the election on the issue of adopting the alternative plan of government (7-3-187 (5), MCA). The question of whether to adopt an alternative form can be submitted to voters in conjunction with any regularly scheduled election (7-3-192 (1) MCA). Your study commission should plan to place any proposed changes on the ballot no later than the general election on November 3, 2026, to remain consistent with the original intended 2-year review cycle length. 26 4 If you recommend no changes, you need to publish and distribute the final report within 60 days after the final report is adopted (7-3-186(d), MCA). Regardless of whether your commission recommends change, you are responsible for filing two copies of the final report with the Montana Department of Administration. A copy of the final report must also be submitted to the municipal or county records administrator (county clerk) within 30 days of the adoption of the final report (7-3-187 (4), MCA). Please also send a copy of the final report to the MSU Local Government Center. 27 5 Model Reports Both the tentative and final report contain the same categories of information, so there will be similarities and overlaps between them. We’ve included three model report formats in the Resource Library.1 The first is an example of a report that recommends no changes. The second is a municipal study commission’s report proposing to amend the plan of government of their small Montana community to provide for at-large elections of the town council instead of the present districted or ward-based elections. The third model report recommends a hypothetical change from the current county Commission form of government to a Commission-Manager form. The third model is more elaborate than the first and includes examples of all the required documentation, only a few of which are required in the first model. These three models are examples and should not be construed as advocating for any specific form, recommendation, or outcome. If your study commission recommends amending the present form of government or adopting an alternative form, your final report will be extensive and contain additional components not required if your study commission recommends no change to the existing form of government. However, even if your commission recommends no changes, you must still prepare and publish a final report (7-3-187, MCA). If your study commission recommends any change or amendment to the form of government, you should use the report recommending an alternative form of government as an example upon which to model your final report. However, the examples are not definitive, so feel free to add or remove whatever information will help your study commission most clearly communicate your findings to the public. 1 The Local Government Center acknowledges Sandra Block, James Lopach, and Rick Reese, who prepared the original Study commissioner's Manual on how to write a report, found in the Local Government Review Bulletin, Vol. 3, No. 2, January 1976. Much of this work is drawn directly from their excellent guidelines for study commissions. 28 6 Final Report Requirements The final report can take one of two basic forms: a report that recommends no change or a report that recommends adopting an alternative form of government or amending the existing form. State law is clear about what must be included in the final report (7-3-187 and 7-3-142, MCA). These requirements also apply to the tentative report since it, along with any amendments, will become the final report (see 7-3-186(2)(b), MCA). But these requirements vary depending on whether your study commission recommends change. If you recommend change, the report should be structured around four main sections: 1. Introduction 2. Report Summary a. Study Commission’s Findings b. Key Provisions 3. Comparison of Existing and Proposed Forms of Government a. General Characteristics of the Existing Form b. General Characteristics of the Proposed Form c. Comparison of Specific Characteristics d. Recommendations and Reasons 4. Appendix: a. Required Certificates If your study commission recommends change, the final report must include the materials and documents listed below, each signed by at least a majority of the study commission members (7-3-187, MCA). • Certificate containing the plan of government of the existing form of local government (7-3-142, MCA) • Certificate containing the plan of government of the proposed new form of local government or amendments to the existing plan (7-3-142, MCA) • Certificate containing the plan of apportionment of commissioner districts if electoral districts are contained in the proposed plan of government (7-3-142, MCA) • Comparison of the existing plan and proposed plan of local government, including, if desired, a statement of the strengths and weaknesses of the existing and proposed plans of local government, information that supports the adoption of the proposed plan, and information that supports retention of the present plan (7-3-142, MCA) • Certificate establishing the date of the election, which must be held in conjunction with a regularly scheduled election, at which the alternative form of government will be presented to the voters (7-3-187, 7-3-192, MCA) • Certificate establishing the form of the ballot question or questions (7-3-187, 7-3-192, MCA) • Certificate establishing the dates of the first primary and general elections for officers of a new government if the proposal is approved and establishing the effective date of the proposal if approved (7-3-187, MCA) If your study commission recommends no change, a final report must still be prepared and filed. It should 29 7 include: 1. Introduction 2. Report Summary 3. Plan of government of the existing form It can simply state that no changes are recommended (7-3-187, MCA). In this case, the comparison and appendix certificates are not required. Let’s take a look at the content and purpose of each of these sections. 30 8 Elements of the Final Report: The Introduction The final report's introduction explains the nature and purpose of the report. It also represents your study commission and the work you’ve done. The tone should be direct and friendly, and, because of its intent to engage the voters, a letter is a useful format. The introduction is a concise description of the nature of the Voter Review process in your home community and can include any of the following items: • Identification of study commissioners • Legal authority of the study commission--for example, a summary of the appropriate constitutional and statutory requirements • Short statement of study commission's purpose and responsibilities • Timetable • Summary of your work to date, hearings, formation of a joint commission, use of consultants and expert help, plan of work, etc. You’ll also want to include a table of contents to help the reader see the interrelationship of the parts of the report and anticipate the unfolding argument. The table of contents can precede or follow the introduction or be included in the text of the intro. 31 9 Elements of the Final Report: Report Summary While the final report may not be long, it may still be too long for general distribution. And while many community members may not read a final report from front to back, they may read a summary of recommendations. The report summary can also function as a news release, so it serves a useful purpose for the study commission and the community. The final report summary should address three separate items: 1. A summary of the commission's findings concerning the present governmental situation. This amounts to a listing of the key government-related problems in the community that prompted consideration of government change and a concise explanation of why change is desirable. 2. The second part of the summary contains your recommendation to the voters. Later in the report, you’ll give a detailed analysis of your recommendation; here this recommendation is condensed into a few sentences. The reader should know what governmental change the study commission is endorsing and placing on the ballot. 3. The report summary should include the most concise, convincing arguments for the commission's recommendation. Later in the final report, you’ll compare features of the present and proposed forms of government and evaluate their relative performance against several criteria. Only the most important of these conclusions should be contained in the summary. You’ll need to make sure to print enough copies of the final report for distribution to all who are interested. But you can use the report summary as the main document that gets distributed to all voters (7-3-191, MCA). This summary can answer general questions and should include a comparison chart between the present form of government and the proposed form, the sample ballot, and the plan of government of the proposed form of government. 32 10 Notice Requirements for the Report Summary The requirements for the report summary are found in 7-3-191, MCA. Regardless of whether your final report recommends change or no change, each study commission must publish the summary once each week for two successive weeks in a newspaper circulated throughout the area of the affected local government. The report summary must include your study commission’s findings and recommendations, the address of a convenient public place where the proposal text can be accessed, and a comparison of the existing and proposed plans of government. If the summary is too long for newspaper publication (see the “Example County Final Report Summary” for an idea of what too long looks like), you can publish the recommendations for change, the first part of the summary and a chart comparing specific characteristics of the present and proposed forms of government (see Table 2-1 on pages 15-6 and in the Resource Library). 33 11 Elements of the Final Report: Comparison of Existing and Proposed Forms of Government The comparison of the existing and proposed forms of government should include three separate parts: 1. A comparison of the forms in terms of their general characteristics like required positions, departments, and lines of authority. 2. A comparison of the forms in terms of specific governmental characteristics. This detailed analysis includes a judgment of each form's strengths and weaknesses from multiple perspectives. 3. An overall evaluation of each form according to several standards of governmental performance. This evaluation is the basis for your study commission’s recommendation and supporting reasons. 34 12 Elements of the Final Report: Comparison of General Characteristics In the comparison of general characteristics, fundamental points of comparison include the degree of separation between the executive position and legislative body, degree to which the administration is formally centralized, relative mix of appointed and elected officials, and opportunities for direct citizen participation. This comparison creates a broad framework by depicting the fundamental relationships and reporting lines in the existing and proposed forms. Two methods should be used to accomplish this objective: an organization chart and an explanatory narrative. An org chart laying out the structure of the existing and proposed forms of government is a great way to visually communicate complex information. You can use the chart to highlight the differences and similarities between what exists and what you may propose. Org charts also show relationships between people and functions within the government and can provide a clear and easily digestible summary of information contained in the report. The chart and accompanying discussion highlight general but crucial differences between the forms and set the stage for a more detailed comparison. 35 13 Elements of the Final Report: Comparison of Specific Characteristics Building off the framework created in the previous section, this second part focuses on the nature and function of the present and proposed forms of government and creates the detailed analysis necessary to communicate the significant differences between them. This comparison has four categories: 1. Each structural characteristic being compared. 2. Its appearance and definition in the old form. 3. Its appearance and definition in the proposed form. 4. The study commission's evaluation of the incorporation of each specific characteristic in the two forms. This comparison and evaluation of specific features of present and proposed forms becomes the basis for your study commission’s recommendation to the voters. A table is a clear way to compare the four categories. It should be introduced by an explanatory paragraph and should be constructed with columns for each category: structural characteristics, present form of government, proposed form of government, and evaluative comments. The “Characteristics” column indicates the basis for the comparison which follows. There are multiple possible characteristics that can be included in this column. The following is a list of suggested characteristics to consider: • Powers authorization • Commission size • Commission election districts • Elections—partisan or non-partisan • Commission terms—arrangement • Commission terms—length • Commission administrative function • Elected officials • Chief administrative officer • Appointment powers • Budget powers • Veto powers • Administrative assistant • Boards and commissions • Community councils The “Present Form of Government” column explains if and how that structural feature appears in the existing government and in the alternative form. The discussion should be brief, just one short paragraph. If you have supporting data to include—charts, tables, or figures (number of employees, tax base, population change)—reference it in the table and put it in the appendix. Any significant changes to structural suboptions in the alternative form that will be presented to the 36 14 voters on the ballot should be clearly indicated. In the “Evaluative Comments” column, weigh the relative worth of the two forms on each structural point. Here you’ll indicate which form will best serve the community based on the characteristic under consideration. 37 The Montana State University Extension Service is an ADA/EO/AA/Veteran’s Preference Employer and Provider of Educational Outreach. LOCAL GOVERNMENT REVIEW STUDY COMMISSION GUIDE UNIT 6: THANK GOODNESS THAT'S OVER! CONCLUDING THE REVIEW & CROSSING THE FINISH LINE Comparison of the Existing and Proposed Forms of Government The following chart (Table 2-1) compares thirteen characteristics of the existing form of county government with the proposed form of government. The last column, Evaluative Comments, includes short summaries explaining why the study commission is proposing some changes in each area. CHARACTERISTIC PRESENT FORM PROPOSED FORM EVALUATIVE COMMENTS Form of Government COMMISSION Merges legislative, administrative, and executive powers in commission. COMMISSION-MANAGER Elected commission determines policy. Manager hired to administer policy. Separation of legislative and administrative responsibilities. Manager appointed on basis of experience and training. Powers GENERAL GOVERNING POWERS State law defines what government may do and specifically how it shall do it. Little power to pass ordinances. SELF-GOVERNING POWERS County government shall exercise any power which the state does not deny. Legislative power vested in the Council Self-governing powers bring to the county the power to act in its own best interests and flexibility in shaping government structure. Governing Body Size 3 commissioners nominated by district, elected at-large. 5-member commission, 3 elected in district in which they reside, 2 elected at large. Increase in the size of the council will allow greater representation. District representation assures the council viewpoints from all sections of the county. Governing Body Election Partisan. To be determined by vote. At-large commission will offer county-wide perspective. Governing Body Term 6 year overlapping terms. 4-year concurrent term. Shorter terms on a concurrent basis should enhance council’s responsiveness to voters. Presiding Officer Chairman--Elected from own members. Chairman--Elected from own members. 38 16 Governing Body Duties Commission is responsible for executive and many administrative functions. Administrative powers are shared with other elected officials. Commission is legislative policy making body. Hires a professional manager to administer all departments. Frees council from administration responsibilities to concentrate on policy- making role. Other Elected Officials 10 elected officials: Clerk & Recorder County Attorney Sheriff Treasurer Clerk of Court Public Administrator Coroner Superintendent of Schools Surveyor Auditor None. Independent offices brought under supervision of manager. Qualifications for offices can be established. Chief Administrative Officer None. Administrative responsibility shared by commissioners, elected officials, and various boards. County Manager directs and supervises the administration of all departments. Better overall coordination is possible. Clear lines of authority and responsibility. Appointment Powers Commission appoints department heads not elected, members of boards, commissions, special districts. Commission appoints and removes County Manager, members of boards and commissions. County Manager appoints and removes all department heads and employees and temporary advisory committees. Department heads appointed on basis of qualifications. Responsible to County Manager. Members of boards and commissions continue to be appointed by the commission. Budget Preparation Clerk & Recorder prepares budget with officials and Manager prepares budget. Commission modifies and/or Manager can balance priorities set by commission with available county-wide 39 17 departments. Modified and/or approved by commission. approves. resources, also balance needs of individual departments with overall needs and re- sources of county. Service Delivery Structure Performed by elected offices and appointed boards, commissions, and special districts. County activities could be grouped into a few departments on basis of function. Services performed by departments under supervision of county manager. Many functions now performed by independently elected offices or independent boards are brought under supervision of a professional manager and commission control. Community Councils None. Provides for community councils of three members from each district within the county. Should encourage citizen involvement by providing a structure for participation. 40 The Montana State University Extension Service is an ADA/EO/AA/Veteran’s Preference Employer and Provider of Educational Outreach. LOCAL GOVERNMENT REVIEW STUDY COMMISSION GUIDE UNIT 6: THANK GOODNESS THAT'S OVER! CONCLUDING THE REVIEW & CROSSING THE FINISH LINE Elements of the Final Report: Recommendations & Reasons The preceding comparative analysis of the two competing governmental structures focuses on specific operational aspects of the county or municipal government and forms the basis for your study commission’s assessment of the worth of the two forms and the basis for your recommendation to the voters. The final step in the comparison of present and proposed forms of government lays out your recommendation and rationale. There are two parts to this section: Recommendations and Reasons. Start with your study commission’s recommendation to the voters in a direct, concise introductory paragraph explaining that form X is preferable to form Y and laying out your commission’s criteria for this recommendation. You can use the evaluation criteria in Unit 4 as a starting point. Use all these criteria, some of them, or some other fundamental evaluative standards. The point is to communicate your method of overall assessment and the justification for your recommendation. 41 19 Elements of the Final Report: Report Certificates In a report recommending change, Montana law calls for the inclusion of specific certificates, signed by a majority of the study commission (7-3-142, MCA). Some of these are mandatory and some are optional. At this point in your report, you can include all the required report certificates as appendices. The required certificates are: 1. Plan of government of the existing form 2. Plan of government of the proposed form or amendments to the existing plan 3. Date of the election held in conjunction with a regularly scheduled election 4. Form of the ballot question or questions 5. Dates of the first primary and general elections for officers of a new government and the effective date of the proposal if it is approved. The optional certificates include: 1. Plan for consolidation (if consolidation is proposed) 2. Plan for apportionment (if election districts are contained in the plan of government of the alternative form) 3. Plan for disincorporation (in lieu of the plan for the proposed form of government) 42 20 Special Recommendations There are three special recommendations your study commission could propose: county-municipal consolidation, county merger, or municipal disincorporation. Each has special reporting requirements. County-Municipal Consolidation or County Merger City-County consolidation or the merger of two or more counties may be placed on the ballot only by a joint report by cooperating study commissions. A final report, in addition to the material required in 7-3- 188, 7-3-187, and 7-3-142, MCA, must contain a consolidation plan if county-municipal consolidation or county merger is recommended. The consolidation plan must conform to the provisions and requirements in 7-3-143, MCA when recommending county-municipal consolidation or 7-3-188, 7-3-187, and 7-3-144, MCA when recommending a county merger. The final report for consolidation or county merger looks like the Example Final Report #2 (link to Resource Library) except that additional categories of information must be included. 43 21 Special Requirements for County-Municipal Consolidation Recommendation (7-3-188, 7-3-187, and 7-3-142, 7-3-143, MCA) The consolidation plan must be included in the final report and must provide for: Adjustment of existing bonded indebtedness and other obligations in a manner which assures a fair and equitable burden of taxation for debt service. Establishment of subordinate service districts. Transfer or other disposition of property and other rights, claims, assets, and franchises of the local governments consolidated under its proposal. Official name of the consolidated local government. Transfer, reorganization, abolition, adjustment of boundaries, or absorption of all existing boards, bureaus, special districts, subordinate service districts, local improvement districts, agencies, and political subdivisions of the consolidated governments, excluding school districts and nonconsolidated municipalities. The consolidation plan must also grant the consolidated government’s legislative body the authority to transfer, reorganize, abolish, adjust boundaries (and may provide a method for adjusting boundaries), or absorb existing boards, bureaus, special districts, subordinate service districts, local improvement districts, agencies, and political subdivisions of the consolidated governments, excluding school districts and nonconsolidated municipalities, with or without referendum requirements. The consolidation plan may include other provisions that are consistent with state law. Any study commissions participating in a joint study should remember that if a consolidation plan is proposed, each local government must include a description of their existing plan of government in their final report. 44 22 Special Requirements for County Merger Recommendation (7-3-188, 7-3-187, and 7-3-144, MCA) Whenever county merger is recommended the final report must include the same categories of information required in the final report for an alternative plan of government plus a consolidation plan. The consolidation plan must provide for: • Adjustment of existing bonded indebtedness and other obligations in a manner which assures a fair and equitable burden of taxation for debt service. • Establishment of subordinate service districts. • Transfer or other disposition of property and other rights, claims, assets, and franchises of local governments consolidated under the alternative plan. • Official name of the consolidated local government. • Transfer, reorganization, abolition, adjustment of boundaries, or absorption of existing boards, subordinate service districts, local improvement districts, agencies, and political subdivisions of the consolidated governments, excluding school districts, authorities, and incorporated municipalities. The consolidation plan must grant the legislative body of the consolidated government the authority to transfer, reorganize, abolish, adjust boundaries, or absorb existing boards, subordinate service districts, local improvement districts, agencies, and political subdivisions of the consolidated governments, excluding school districts, authorities, and incorporated municipalities, with or without referendum requirements. 45 23 Disincorporation If a study commission proposes municipal disincorporation, the final report must contain a certificate of disincorporation instead of a plan of government and a recommended plan of disincorporation. All the other certificates required by 7-3-142, MCA must also be included. The report requirements for disincorporation are found in 7-3-145, MCA and 7-3-189, MCA. 46 24 Minority Reports A majority of a study commission’s members are required to agree on and complete the required report components. If there is a dissenting minority, Montana law allows for inclusion of a minority report signed by members of the commission who do not support the majority proposal in the study commission's final report (7-3-187 (2), MCA). A commission minority’s decision to write a minority report is a matter of significance, especially if attached to a report recommending change. Majority and minority opinions in the final report present a publicly divided commission, focus public discussion, and give a rallying point to opponents of the majority position. If your study commission considers including a minority report, carefully consider its potential effect on acceptance of the proposal offered in the report and understand the need for thorough public discussion. As the work of a commission minority, a minority report may diverge in both form and substance from the majority's report. For clarity, the minority report should parallel the formatting and arrangement of the majority report, either by reference or by repetition. Organization by repetition is the most useful option if the minority objects to a significant portion of the majority's position. List all the majority's headings and subheadings and state either "no objection" or "objection." Where there are objections, state the minority's position in a single paragraph. If the minority report parallels the majority report by reference, cite only the objectionable parts of the majority position. Identify each part and succinctly state the minority's objection in a paragraph. Include the minority’s preferred alternative. These two approaches are suggestions among a variety of possible alternatives. A minority report could be a signed report of objection to all or part of the majority position, a report or objection backed up by a general response in one or two paragraphs, or an entire counter position, presented by minority members as effectively as possible with little or no reference to the majority's report. 47 25 Supplementary Reports Supplementary reports are separate from the final report and serve a variety of useful purposes. If your study commission recommends consolidation of services and functions via interlocal agreement, you’ll need to prepare a separate supplementary report in addition to the final report (7-3-190, MCA). However, supplementary reports aren’t limited to suggestions for service consolidations and interlocal agreements. Over the course of the review, your study commission may identify solutions for improving the function and efficiency of the local government. Your commission can submit a supplementary report to recommend useful, potentially impactful suggestions to your local government that do not involve proposing any alterations to the form of government and so do not need to be submitted to the voters. For example, in a previous review cycle, the Richland County study commission identified a significant problem with the county court caseload burden. During their research, the commission observed that the county attorney’s office was overwhelmed with the load, which slowed down various aspects of the county’s efficiency and responsiveness. The commission submitted a supplemental report recommending the addition of a deputy attorney to help with the caseload burden. Since they weren’t proposing an alteration to the form of government, they didn’t need to submit the recommendation to the voters. Or, for another example, if you remember, for a city-county service consolidation proposal to be put to the electors, there must be cooperation between the two study commissions. But the municipal study commission might conclude that consolidation of a service should be suggested, while the county study commission isn’t interested, or the county isn’t participating in the review and has no mechanism for cooperating. A supplementary report might spur the municipality to investigate further and take steps to implement the suggested change with the county’s cooperation. The timeframe for supplementary reports is different from that of final reports (7-3-190, MCA). If your commission writes any supplementary reports, they must be submitted to all appropriate governing bodies for reaction within one year. 48 26 Holding the Election (7-3-192 and 7-3-149, MCA) If your study commission recommends an alternative plan of government or an amendment to the existing plan in your final report, the recommendation must be submitted to the voters at an election to be held in conjunction with a regularly scheduled election. There are four regularly scheduled elections in 2025-26: • Municipal elections on September 9 and November 4, 2025 • Primary and general elections on June 2 and November 3, 2026, respectively (applicable to counties—13-1-104, MCA and 13-1-107, MCA) The timing of the adoption of the final report is an important factor in selecting which of the regularly scheduled election dates is most appropriate. The final report must be filed early enough to issue a call for the election. Election officials require the ballot format at least 75 days in advance of an election to accommodate legal review and printing lead times. • June 27, 2025 — 75 days before the primary election on September 9, 2025 • August 22, 2025 — 75 days before the general election on November 4, 2025 • March 20, 2026 — 75 days before the primary election on June 2, 2026 • August 21, 2026 — 75 days before the general election on November 3, 2026 We recommend adopting and filing the final report at least 30 days in advance of this date, which would be 105 days before the preferred election date. Since you never know what hiccups might arise, 120 days would be even better. • May 13, 2025 — 120 days before the primary election on September 9, 2025 • July 8, 2025 — 120 days before the general election on November 4, 2025 • February 3, 2026 — 120 days before the primary election on June 2, 2026 • July 7, 2026 — 120 days before the general election on November 3, 2026 The tricky process of figuring out accurate dates is made even more complicated by the fact that municipal elections are held in odd years; county elections are held in even years. Counties will not have a general election in 2025. If your county study commission wants to proceed and put something on the ballot in November 2025, you will have to do a stand-alone ballot. Your study commission will be responsible for the additional election expenses incurred including ballot paper costs and mailing expenses to send ballots out to all registered voters in the county. Both municipalities and counties can use the November 2026 general election.2 2 Attorney General's Opinions Study Commission to Establish Election Date on Question of Amendments: A local government study commission, rather than a Board of County Commissioners, is authorized to call for and establish an 49 27 And, as mentioned earlier in this unit, the latest possible date for a study commission to place a proposed plan of government or an amendment to an existing plan on the ballot is the general election on November 3, 2026. The timing of all of this can get tricky. To avoid unpleasant surprises, we urge you to coordinate with your local government and your county election administrator. election date on the question of amendments to the existing form of government proposed in the study commission's final report. (See 1995 amendment.) 41 A.G. Op. 44 (1986). 50 28 Ballot Requirements (7-3-150 and 7-3-151, MCA) If you remember from Unit 4, there are limits to the kind and number of changes your commission can propose. The ballot statutes determine the petition requirements for the question of adopting a new form or an alteration to an existing form of government (7-3-150). Potential alterations include adopting or amending a self-governing charter, adopting a new form of government, or amending the current form of government. Any proposed change of form or plan of government must be submitted to the voters (worded on the ballot) as a single question although the suboptions within the alternative forms of government, and the suboptions authorized in a charter may be submitted to the voters as separate questions (7-3-151, MCA). Let’s look at the statutory ballot language, the wording that would go on the ballot, in 7-3-150, MCA to clarify. The question is submitted to voters using the following format: Vote for one: [ ] FOR adoption of the (self-government charter, amendment to an existing charter, or plan of government) proposed for (insert name of local government) proposed by petition of the people. [ ] FOR the existing form of government. There are also limits to the number of suboptions that can be included on a petition. 7-3-151, MCA says that a petition recommendation cannot include more than three suboptions; each of those three suboptions cannot have more than two alternatives. This explanation is also easier to understand when you look at the ballot language. Here is the statutory example of one suboption with two proposed alternatives: Vote for one: A legal officer (who may be called the "county attorney"): [ ] To be elected for a term of 4 years. [ ] To be appointed for a term of 4 years by the presiding officer of the local governing body. Two more suboptions, each with two proposed alternatives, could be included on this ballot. Because of the complexities of timing and language, we recommend contacting your local election officials in the county Clerk and Recorder's office for assistance preparing the ballot certificate required by 7-3-187, MCA. 51 29 Preparing the Transition Plan (7-3-193 and 7-3-157 and 158, Montana Code Annotated) If you recommend an alternative plan of government and it’s adopted by the voters, your terms of office as study commissioners are extended by 90 days from the date of the election on the proposed alternative plan. Your study commission must also prepare an advisory plan for orderly transition to the new plan of government (7-3-178, 7-3-193(2)(b), MCA). The transition plan may propose necessary ordinances, plans for consolidation of services and functions, and a plan for reorganizing boards, departments, and agencies. To facilitate an orderly transition to the new plan of government, the local governing body has the authority to enact and enforce ordinances that are consistent with the approved plan and necessary or convenient to place it into full effect (7-3-157, MCA). The alternative form will take effect when the new officers take office, unless otherwise provided in any charter or consolidation plan (7-3-156 through 7-3-161, MCA). A consolidation or merger adopted by the electors takes effect in the same manner. An amendment to an existing plan of government becomes effective at the beginning of the local government's fiscal year after the election results are officially declared (7-3-156 (3), MCA). Provisions for creating offices and establishing qualifications for office under any apportionment plan become effective immediately in order to elect officials. Members of the governing body in office on the date the electors adopt the new plan of government continue in office and perform their duties until the new governing body has been elected and qualified. At this point, the prior governing body is abolished. All other employees holding offices or positions, whether elected or appointed under the government of the county or municipality, continue in the performance of their duties until provisions are made for the performance or discontinuation of their offices or positions. A charter proposing an alteration to an existing form of local government may provide that existing elected officers continue in office, even if that office no longer exists under the new plan of government, until the end of their elected term. It can also provide those existing elected officers be retained as local government employees until the end of their term and prevent their salaries from being reduced (7-3- 158, MCA). All existing ordinances and resolutions continue when the new form of government goes into effect until repealed or amended in the manner provided by law. Within two years after ratification of a consolidation plan, the governing body of the consolidated local government must revise, repeal, or reaffirm all rules, ordinances, and resolutions in force within the participating county and municipalities at the time of consolidation. Each rule, ordinance, or resolution in force at the time of consolidation remains in force within the former geographic jurisdiction until superseded by action of the new governing body. Ordinances and resolutions relating to public improvements to be paid for in whole or in part by special assessments may not be repealed (7-3-159, MCA). 52 30 Within 20 days after an election where the new plan of government is approved by the electors, the governing body must meet and order a special primary and general election for the purpose of electing the officials required by the new form of government. The elections for officials may be held in conjunction with any other election (7-3-160, MCA). The first meeting of a new governing body for a new plan of government shall be held at 10 am, 60 days after the election of the new officers. At that time, newly elected members shall take the oath of office prior to assuming the duties of office. If the terms of the commissioners are to be overlapping, they shall draw lots to establish their respective terms of office (7-3-161, MCA). 53 31 Unit Conclusion As you’ve seen, the majority of the concluding work of the review relies heavily on the decisions your study commission will make about whether to recommend change and on the chain reaction of deadlines and specific timeframes set off by your adoption of the final report. There are multiple permutations for the conclusion of the process, and we recommend designating generous amounts of time to the various steps. Now that you’ve come to the end of the course, we hope you have a much better understanding of the entirety of the Voter Review process, its specific and complex moving parts, and a clear sense of how to proceed to execute the process and fulfill your obligations as study commissioners. Remember that you’ll have access to all of the course content for your tenure as study commissioners. Don’t feel like you have to know it all and be a master of the process at this point. We hope you know a good deal more than when you started, but you can also refer to this content whenever you need a refresher or clarification. And all the content in the Resource Library is available for your exploration and use. You also have the Working Group Discussion Forum to use as you work through the process. We encourage you to continue actively engaging with other study commissions for idea and resource sharing, tips and suggestions, questions, and general commiseration and support. From our experience with other online learning platforms and courses, the forum is one of the most valuable resources you’ve got; we hope you use it. Finally, since this is a new course, you’re our lucky guinea pigs. Your feedback, comments, suggestions, and thoughtful critiques will be instrumental in helping us improve this course for the next Voter Review cycle and future study commissioners. We have a course evaluation at the end of this unit, and we’d be grateful if you take a few minutes to fill it out. We’d love your input, not only on the course content and organization, but also on the ways the course helped prepare you for your role. Thanks for joining us. Best of luck! 54 Memorandum REPORT TO:Study Commission FROM:Caeleb Heinen, Recording Secretary Mike Maas, Ex Officio SUBJECT:Request the Montana State University Local Government Center complete research for Bozeman City Study Commission MEETING DATE:December 4, 2025 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Citizen Advisory Board/Commission RECOMMENDATION:Consider the Motion: I move to request the Montana State University Local Government Center to conduct research on behalf of the Bozeman City Study Commission. STRATEGIC PLAN:1.1 Outreach: Continue to strengthen and innovate in how we deliver information to the community and our partners. BACKGROUND:Request the MSU Local Government Center complete research on behalf of the Bozeman City Study Commission. Study Commissioners Becky Franks and Deanna Campbell will provide their initial findings on the scope and funding of the research and the Study Commissioners will decide whether to continue this Research Request. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None identified ALTERNATIVES:As per the Commission FISCAL EFFECTS:TBD Report compiled on: November 24, 2025 55 Memorandum REPORT TO:Study Commission FROM:Caeleb Heinen, Recording Secretary Mike Maas, Ex Officio SUBJECT:Potential Meeting topics MEETING DATE:December 4, 2025 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Citizen Advisory Board/Commission RECOMMENDATION:This item is a living list of potential future meeting topics. STRATEGIC PLAN:1.1 Outreach: Continue to strengthen and innovate in how we deliver information to the community and our partners. BACKGROUND:Study Commission Purview and Charge Charter Crises and City Attorney notes of issues in current Charter Staff identified "pinch points" Develop and adopt a discovery plan for best practices to be learned from other communities. Following deliberation and public input, decide the Power structure desired for the City of Bozeman Following deliberation and public input, decide the Form of government for the City of Bozeman Following deliberation and public input, decide the Plan sub-options that will be under consideration Following deliberation and public input, decide the Recommendations that will be under consideration Draft a Tentative Report and submit for legal review Second Public Hearing—to gather citizen response to Tentative Report Adopt the Final Report from Second Public Hearing UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None identified. ALTERNATIVES:As per the Study Commission. FISCAL EFFECTS:TBD Report compiled on: November 24, 2025 56