HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-28-26 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
Wednesday, January 28, 2026
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 No Claims to Approve
D.2 No Minutes to Approve
E. Correspondence or Study Commission Update
F. Unfinished Business
F.1 Discussion and Decisions Items (Franks)
G. New Business
G.1 Upcoming Agendas Discussion(Maas)
G.2 Options for an Alternative to July 2
H. Future Agenda Items
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.
1. Deputy Mayor: Section 2.03 (b) eliminate Deputy Mayor position
2. Partisanship: Section 6.01 (a) Election of Mayor and Commissioners will continue to be
nonpartisan or switch to partisan
3. Filling Commissioner Vacancies: Section 2.06 (c) Filling of Vacancies shall occur within ___ days
4. Other Elected Offices: Article IV
5. Duties of Commissioners: Should there be a change in Section 2.01? Options include: keep it the
same, make a comprehensive list, or state that the Commissioners must write a job description and
then review it every 5 years.
6. Number of Commissioners and Part-time/Full-time
a. Do we want Citizen Representation? Do we want the ability for Commissioners to work in
Bozeman?
b. Mayor part-time/full-time: Section 2.03 (b)
c. Commissioner part-time/full-time: 2.01
d. Dictate salary or describe salary outcome or guidelines
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.
2
Study Commission meetings are televised live on cable channel 190 and streamed live on our
Meeting Videos Page.
3
Memorandum
REPORT TO:Study Commission
SUBJECT:No Claims to Approve
MEETING DATE:January 28, 2026
AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Citizen Advisory Board/Commission
RECOMMENDATION:Ex Officio Maas is re-working the budget spreadsheet to better reflect more
accurate details of expenditures. New claims will be presented at a future
meeting.
4
Memorandum
REPORT TO:Study Commission
SUBJECT:No Minutes to Approve
MEETING DATE:January 28, 2026
AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Citizen Advisory Board/Commission
RECOMMENDATION:Software errors prevent vote tallies from appearing correctly in the summary
documents. Vendor engineering is working to address the issue; if it is not
resolved in a reasonable time we will manually create the information.
December 18 Meeting Video
January 15 Meeting Video
5
Memorandum
REPORT TO:Study Commission
FROM:Caeleb Heinen, Recording Study
Mike Maas, Ex Officio
SUBJECT:Discussion and Decisions Items
MEETING DATE:January 28, 2026
AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Citizen Advisory Board/Commission
RECOMMENDATION:1. Deputy Mayor: Section 2.03 (b) eliminate Deputy Mayor position
2. Partisanship: Section 6.01 (a) Election of Mayor and Commissioners will
continue to be nonpartisan or switch to partisan
3. Filling Commissioner Vacancies: Section 2.06 (c) Filling of Vacancies shall
occur within ___ days
4. Other Elected Offices: Article IV
5. Duties of Commissioners: Should there be a change in Section 2.01?
Options include: keep it the same, make a comprehensive list, or state that
the Commissioners must write a job description and then review it every 5
years.
6. Number of Commissioners and Part-time/Full-time
a. Do we want Citizen Representation? Do we want the ability for
Commissioners to work in Bozeman?
b. Mayor part-time/full-time: Section 2.03 (b)
c. Commissioner part-time/full-time: 2.01
d. Dictate salary or describe salary outcome or guidelines
STRATEGIC PLAN:1.1 Outreach: Continue to strengthen and innovate in how we deliver
information to the community and our partners.
BACKGROUND:After the discussion at the January 15 meeting the City Study Commission
requested the following information:
Requested attachments:
1. Fiscal implications of adding Commissioners at current salary (Ordinance
Attached)
2. Survey results related to the decision topics listed above (Survey Results,
January 15 notes, and Discussion Topic Attached)
3. Model Cities Document pages 13-20 (Attached)
4. Full or part time commission information, including living wage salary
(MIT Living Wage Calculator for Gallatin County , HUD Data and explanation
attached)
5. City Comparison Document (attached)
6
UNRESOLVED ISSUES:none identified
ALTERNATIVES:As per the City Study Commission
FISCAL EFFECTS:TBD
Attachments:
23- Ordinances 2152 - Amending the Salaries and Expenses of
the City Commissioners and Mayor of the City of
Bozeman.pdf
BCSC January 28th Topic Document .pdf
Pages 13-25 from Model-City-Charter9th-Edition.pdf
Municipal Comparison Chart.xlsx
BCSC - City Commission Notes.pdf
BCSC - Employee Survey Results.pdf
RE_ Bozeman AMI.pdf
Report compiled on: January 22, 2026
7
ORDINANCE NO. 2152
Page 1 of 4
ORDINANCE NO. 2152
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN,
MONTANA, AMENDING THE SALARIES AND EXPENSES OF THE CITY
COMMISSIONERS AND MAYOR OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN.
WHEREAS, Sec. 2.04 of the City of Bozeman Charter authorizes, the City Commission
to determine the annual salary of the Commission and Mayor by ordinance; and
WHEREAS, said section of the Charter also requires that no ordinance increasing such
salary shall become effective until the date of commencement of the terms of commission
members elected at the next regular election; and
WHEREAS, said section of the Charter authorizes the mayor and commission members
to receive, in addition to a salary, their actual ordinary and necessary expenses incurred in the
performance of their duties of office.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA:
Section 1
Commencing upon the first regular meeting of the City Commission in January 2024, the
monthly salary of a City Commissioner shall be $2,251.00. Pursuant to 2.02.150, BMC, for each
month of service, the monthly salary of the Mayor shall be $3,376.50, equal to one and one-half
(1.5) times that of the Commissioners. In addition, commencing with the first Commission
meeting in January of 2025, the above salaries shall be adjusted annually based on the U.S.
Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers for All Items as published in the preceding
December.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 19961B5A-92C5-42E4-99E8-30E52ED30805
856
ORDINANCE NO. 2152
Page 2 of 4
Section 2
In the event of an unexcused absence from a Commission meeting by a Commissioner, the
sum of $562.75 shall be deducted from the monthly pay and for an unexcused absence by the
Mayor, the sum of $844.13 shall be deducted from the monthly pay. The amount of deduction
shall likewise be adjusted as the annual salary is adjusted with the deduction for each unexcused
absence equal to a rate of 25% of the monthly salary.
Section 3
In addition to the salaries, the City Commissioners, other than the Mayor, shall receive a
monthly allowance of $200.00 for incidental expenses. The Mayor shall receive a monthly
allowance of $300.00 for incidental expenses. The Mayor and City Commissioners may be
reimbursed for actual cost of other reimbursable expenses, such as registrations for conferences
and seminars, dinner meetings, and other in-state or out-of-town travel and expenses.
Section 4
During their term in office, City Commissioners may opt to participate in the employee
benefits program provided to individual City employees and may choose the type of coverage plan
they wish to participate in of those offered by the Montana Municipal Interlocal Authority
(MMIA). As such, the City Commissioners may opt to receive the standard City contribution to
health insurance coverage applicable to City employees at the amount set for all City employees
and elected officials. In addition, City Commissioners may opt to participate in, at their own cost,
health club memberships and ancillary benefits pursuant to policies established by the City
Manager.
Section 5
Effective Date.
The salaries listed in Section 1 and the provisions of Section 2 and Section 3 shall be
effective at the commencement of the terms of the City Commissioners and Mayor elected in the
2023 general City election which date shall be the first regular meeting of the Commission in
January 2024. Section 4 is effective immediately.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 19961B5A-92C5-42E4-99E8-30E52ED30805
957
ORDINANCE NO. 2152
Page 3 of 4
Section 6
Repealer.
All resolutions, ordinances and sections of the Bozeman Municipal Code and parts thereof
in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.
Section 7
Severability.
If any provisions of this ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstances
is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions of this Ordinance which may
be given effect without the invalid provision or application and, to this end, the provisions of this
ordinance are declared to be severable.
Section 8
This Ordinance shall not be codified but shall be kept by the City Clerk and entered into a
disposition list in numerical order with all other ordinances as determined by the City Clerk.
PROVISIONALLY PASSED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana,
on first reading at a regular session held on the ____ day of September, 2023.
____________________________________
CYNTHIA L. ANDRUS
Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________________
MIKE MAAS
City Clerk
DocuSign Envelope ID: 19961B5A-92C5-42E4-99E8-30E52ED30805
12th
XXXXXXXXXXXX Alex Newby
XXXXXXXXXXX Deputy City Clerk
1058
ORDINANCE NO. 2152
Page 4 of 4
FINALLY PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED by the City Commission of the
City of Bozeman, Montana on second reading at a regular session thereof held on the ___ of
____________________, 2023.
_________________________________
CYNTHIA L. ANDRUS
Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
MIKE MAAS
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________________
GREG SULLIVAN
City Attorney
DocuSign Envelope ID: 19961B5A-92C5-42E4-99E8-30E52ED30805
Alex Newby
26th
Deputy City Clerk
XXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXX
September
1159
COMPARATIVE SURVEY RESULTS
TOPICS FOR 1.28.26
Note:
These are comparisons of the Community Survey and Employee Survey across six different topic areas anticipated for
discussion at the January 28, 2026 Study Commission meeting.
1. The Role of Deputy Mayor (Charter Section 2.03(b))
The Employee Survey asked about the impact of various roles in local government on their day-to-day work. City
Employees scored the role of Deputy Mayor (1.91) at the second lowest rating, with only Neighbourhood Councils scoring
less (2.17). No direct questions regarding the role of Deputy Mayor were asked on the Community Survey.
|
2. Partisanship (Charter Section 6.01)
There were no questions in either the Community Survey or the Employee Survey that directly asked whether elections
should be partisan in nature. There were questions related to whether additional offices (such as City Clerk, City Attorney,
etc. should be elected on both surveys, but there was no partisan relationship asked related to those questions.
3. Filling Commissioner Vacancies (Section 2.06(c)
There were no questions in either the Community Survey or the Employee Survey that directly asked about the process to
fill Commissioner vacancies.
12
|
4. Other Elected Offices (Article IV of the Charter)
There were questions in both the Community Survey and the Employee Survey that directly asked about other positions
being elected. In the Community Survey, there was more support for other offices being elected, but it still failed to capture
the majority of respondents. In the Employee Survey, a much higher percentage respondent that would would not be in
favor of more positions being elected. There was a decent number of not sure/need more information responses in both
surveys.
Community Survey
Yes, I would support more officials (209)
No, I would prefer these positions remain appointed (178)
Not sure / Need more information (131)
Employee Survey
Yes, I would support more officials (29)
No, I would prefer these positions remain appointed (103)
Not sure / Need more information (34)
13
|
5. Duties of Commissioners (Charter Section 2.01)
There were no direct questions in either the Community Survey or the Employee Survey that directly asked about the
duties of Commissioners. Although there was a question asked about the impact the Commissioners have on the day-to-
day work of City Employees was asked in the City Employee survey. City Commissioners (2.7) were the second-highest
scoring in this question, behind only the City Manager (3.87). This in an indicator that their current duties significantly
impacts the work of many City Employees.
6. Number of Commissioners, Part-Time or Full-Time Role of Commissioners and Mayor, and Salaries (Charter
Sections 2.01, 2.03)
There were questions in both the Community Survey and the Employee Survey that directly asked about whether the
number of City Commissioners should be expanded. In the Community Survey, there was a higher percentage of
individuals responding ‘Yes’ to the question at 33.7% compared to 22.7% in the Employee Survey. The percentage of
individuals responding ‘No’ to the question were 41.7% in the Community Survey versus 53.4% in the Employee Survey.
‘Unsure’ responses exceeded 20% in both, at 24.6% in the Community Survey and 23.9% in the Employee Survey.
Community Survey
Yes, (33.7%)
No (41.7%)
Unsure (24.6%)
Employee Survey
Yes (22.7%)
No (53.4%)
Unsure (23.9%)
14
|
There were questions in both the Community Survey and the Employee Survey that directly asked about the role and
duites of of Mayor, as it relates to City Government. Generally, the Community Survey results indicate a preference for the
Hybrid Executive Model, while the Employee Survey preferred the existing Legislative Leader role for the Mayor.
Community Survey
Hybrid Executive (33.8%)
Legislative Leader(31.3%)
Executive Leader(18.5%)
Hybrid Legislative (13.7%)
Employee Survey
Hybrid Executive (21.2%)
Legislative Leader(60.0%)
Executive Leader(4.2%)
Hybrid Legislative (21.2%)
15
13
Article II CITY COUNCIL
Introduction.
The city council, elected by, representative of, and responsible to the residents of the city is the
fundamental democratic element of the council-manager plan.
Section 2.01. General Powers and Duties.
All powers of the city shall be vested in the city council, except as otherwise provided by law or this
charter, and the council shall provide for the exercise thereof and for the performance of all duties and
obligations imposed on the city by law.
Commentary.
This section does not specifically enumerate the powers of the council. An enumeration of specific
powers in this article will not enlarge the powers of the council and may operate to diminish them if
utilized by the courts to support restrictive interpretations (see commentary to § 1.02). In his commentary
on the first Model City Charter endorsing the council-manager plan (―The City Council in The New
Municipal Program, 1919), William Bennet Munro noted that:
So far as the composition and powers of the city council are concerned the plan set forth in the
Model City Charter rests upon the conviction that there should be a place in the municipal
framework for a body which will be avowedly deliberative, supervisory, and policy-determining,
which will be wieldy enough to perform these functions properly and yet large enough to be truly
representative of the community’s options. . . . The Model City Charter accordingly provides for
a council with a membership which can be enlarged or contracted according to the varying size
and needs of different cities. This council is to be the pivot of the municipal system. It is to be the
final source of local authority, not sharing its powers but delegating some of them. That is to say,
to a city manager chosen by the council and holding office during the council's pleasure, it
assigns the entire charge of administrative affairs . . . As for the powers of the city council . . . It
is designed to embody, as it were, the sovereignty of the community. It is the legislative organ of
the city exercising all the authority which the municipal corporation possesses—with one
important exception only. This restriction is that the city council, once it selects a city manager,
devolves all direct administrative authority upon him.
Recognizing that all of the powers that can be exercised by the city rest in the popularly elected city
council, the charter must provide for a council that is truly representative of the community. Therefore,
the Model presents several alternatives with recognition of the advantages of certain alternatives over
others. Each city’s population pattern— economic level, racial, ethnicity, geographical, etc.—has
implications for the method of electing the council to assure equitable representation. While the Voting
Rights Act governs all jurisdictions, in some cities the problem of compliance with its provisions and
avoidance of court challenges is a matter of particular concern. Just as there is no absolute model for
providing competent and effective legislators, there is no absolute pattern which will assure equitable
representation.
As the body charged with making municipal policy, the council can create permanent or ad hoc
mechanisms to assist in that process. For example, it can create planning and recreation boards or study
16
14
committees. Likewise, it can create agencies with quasi-legislative or quasi-judicial status, such as a
human rights commission or a zoning appeals board.
The Model provides that the mayor shall be the presiding officer and a voting member of the council and
shall perform certain specific duties which will enhance the mayor's role as policy leader.
Section 2.02. Eligibility, Terms, and Composition.
(a) Eligibility. Only registered voters of the city shall be eligible to hold the office of council member or
mayor.
Commentary.
This section does not include length of residence requirements for city council candidates. In an era of
great mobility in which people frequently live in one place and work in another, length of residence
requirements lose what little validity they may once have had. A prospective council member need only
be a registered voter of the city.
(b) Terms.
The term of office of elected officials shall be four years elected in accordance with Article VI.
Commentary.
The Model recommends four-year, staggered terms (§ 6.03). Under this approach, elections of council
members take place every two years. In the seventh edition, the Model listed concurrent terms as an
alternative. However, a strong majority of cities have chosen staggered terms over concurrent terms to
avoid dramatic changes in council composition at each election.
The Model does not restrict reelection to subsequent four-year terms. Limiting reelection restricts the
voters’ opportunity to keep in office council members of whom they approve. Unlimited terms allow
voters to provide a vote of confidence for council members who represent majority sentiment and a vote
of opposition for members in the minority. Finally, the city benefits from the institutional memory of
reelected council members.
(c) Composition.
There shall be a city council composed of [ ] members [see alternatives below].
Commentary.
The Model does not specify the exact number of council members but recommends that the council be
small – ranging from five to nine members. If the mayor were elected by and from the council (§ 2.03(b),
Alternative I), there would be an odd number of council members. In the largest cities, a greater number
of council members may be necessary to assure equitable representation. However, smaller city councils
are more effective instruments for the development of programs and conduct of municipal business than
large local legislative bodies. In the United States, it has been an exceptional situation when a large
municipal council, broken into many committees handling specific subjects, has been able to discharge its
responsibilities promptly and effectively. In large councils, members usually represent relatively small
districts with the frequent result that parochialism and “log-rolling”—bargaining for and exchanging
votes on a quid pro quo basis— distract attention from the problems of the whole city.
17
15
In determining the size of the council, charter drafters should consider the diversity of population
elements to be represented and the size of the city.
Alternative 1 - Option A - District elections of an even number of council members.
Alternative 1 – Option B - Combination of district and at-large elections of an even number of council
members.
Alternative 1 – Option C - In small homogeneous communities, at-large elections of an even number of
council members may be suitable.
With each option, the mayor is elected separately as provided in § 2.03(b).
Commentary.
The Model for the first time recommends district or a combination of districts and at-large seats on city
councils be used to address diversity and representation issues. The 8th edition listed district and mixed
election systems as one of several alternatives, listing them after the alternatives of at-large election with
district residency requirements. At-large elections should only be considered as an alternative for small
communities that are homogeneous or have no geographic concentration of underrepresented voters.
Adding district residency requirements disperses the members of the council geographically, but all the
members of the council can still be elected by the same majority. Under-representation of specific
interests is always a potential outcome with at-large elections.
Community members may feel isolated from and unconnected to their government without some
geographical basis of representation. Cities with significant differences in or conflicts among ethnic,
racial, or economic groups should consider which of the first two alternative systems will achieve more
equitable representation of the city's population, promote sound governance, and avoid legal challenges
under the Voting Rights Act.
The growing recognition that membership on councils should represent all racial and ethnic groups more
adequately has spurred increased use of the single-member district system. With under-represented
groups concentrated in particular sections of the city, it is easier to elect council members that represent
those groups. Also, because district campaigns cost substantially less than citywide campaigns, single-
member districts can open the way for greater diversity among candidates. Also, residents feel closer to
district elected council members, whom they can hold responsible for addressing their community
concerns.
In cities where courts have found that the at-large method of electing the city council violates the Voting
Rights Act, the Justice Department has regularly approved the single-member district system as a
replacement. The single-member system has drawbacks. An inherent problem is the danger that district
elected members will subordinate citywide concerns to parochial problems. Single-member systems also
have potential for the classic problem of "log-rolling" or vote swapping. Whenever districts are used, the
drawing of district lines to provide "fair and equal" districts is of utmost importance and may involve
litigation. Section 6.03 provides districting procedures and criteria designed to prevent gerrymandering
and unequal districts, which are unconstitutional under the one person, one vote doctrine.
The mixed system for a council with members elected at large and members elected by and from districts
has become increasingly popular since the U. S. Department of Justice approved it as a method of electing
the city council that is compliant with the requirements of the Voting Rights Act. This makes the mixed
method suitable in places where the at-large system has been challenged but where change to a single-
18
16
member district system is opposed. The mixed system combines the citywide perspective of the at-large
council members with the local concerns and accountability of district council members. It can allow
underrepresented residents who live in concentrated areas to influence or even determine the outcome of
elections in their districts.
A problem can arise in mixed systems when at-large council members consider their position to be
superior to that of district members and are perceived as rivals to the mayor. To prevent this, at-large and
district council members should have equal status with respect to offices, services, and length of terms.
Local preference should decide the ratio of at-large to district members. Opinion ranges from favoring a
majority being elected at large to a majority being elected by and from districts. However, for
jurisdictions concerned about scrutiny by the U. S. Department of Justice or the courts under either § 2 or
§ 5 of the Voting Rights Act, precedent shows a clear preference for a majority of the council to be
elected by and from districts.
Section 2.03. Mayor.
(a) Powers and Duties. The mayor shall be a voting member of the city council and shall attend and
preside at meetings of the council, represent the city in intergovernmental relationships, appoint with the
advice and consent of the council the members of community advisory boards and commissions, present
an annual state of the city message, appoint the members and officers of council committees, assign
subject to the consent of council agenda items to committees, and perform other duties specified by the
council. The mayor shall be recognized as head of the city government for all ceremonial purposes and by
the governor for purposes of military law but shall have no administrative duties.
(b) Election. At each regular election the voters of the city shall elect a mayor at large for a term of [the
same term as other council members] years. The council shall elect from among its members a deputy
mayor who shall act as mayor during the absence or disability of the mayor and, if a vacancy occurs, shall
become mayor for the remainder of the unexpired term.
Commentary.
(a) The office of mayor in cities having the council-manager form assumes a different character from city
to city depending upon local political, economic, and social conditions. This variation has meant that the
office is not well understood, and its potential has too often gone unrecognized. While the mayor of a
council-manager city is not an executive as in the mayor-council form, he or she is uniquely positioned to
be the political and policy leader of the city. As the presiding officer of the council and ceremonial head
of the city, the mayor is the most conspicuous official of the city. Freedom from executive responsibilities
for the day-to-day municipal operations allows the mayor to focus attention on major policy issues and
important facilitative activities.
The mayor fills three facilitative roles that offer enormous leadership opportunities. First, the mayor may
coordinate the activities of other officials by providing liaison between the city manager and the council,
fostering a sense of cohesion among council members, and educating the public about the needs and
prospects of the city. Second, the mayor may facilitate policy guidance through setting goals for the
council and advocating the adoption of policies that address the city's problems. Third, the mayor is an
ambassador who promotes the city and represents it in dealing with other governments as well as the
public.
The specific responsibilities of the mayor listed in the Model enhance the mayor's leadership position.
The traditional responsibility of presiding at council meetings allows the mayor to set the tone for city
19
17
government and help the council make decisions. Designation of the mayor as intergovernmental
representative reflects the increased importance of relationships with other local governments as well as
with the state and federal governments.
Mayoral appointment of boards and commissions with council advice and consent and of the membership
of council committees creates the opportunity for purposeful balanced representation and can be used to
forge coalitions and tap into networks of community activity. Finally, the mayor delivers the state of the
city message. When the state of the city message includes the setting out of needs and goals for the city, it
should reflect the thinking of the council and information provided by the staff, as well as the mayor's
own priorities. In presenting the state of the city message, the mayor acts as spokesperson, educator, team
leader, goal setter, and policy advocate. To avoid confusion, the time of delivery of the message should be
sufficiently distanced from the presentation of the budget by the manager.
More than half of the cities operating with the council-manager form use the direct election at-large
alternative. Many cities, particularly larger ones, believe that this method increases the potential for
mayoral leadership by giving the mayor a citywide popular support base. This is particularly important
when all or most of the council members are elected from districts. A potential disadvantage of this
method is that the mayor may have views that diverge widely from those of a majority of the council on
some important issues.
Whatever the method of election or the strength of the mayor's leadership role, the mayor is preeminently
a legislator, a member, and leader of the council; the mayor is not an executive. However, the office may
require some special staff support. Whatever arrangements are made for support either through the city
manager or staff in the mayor’s office should be consistent with two premises. First, the mayor should not
encroach on the executive responsibilities of the manager. Second, the mayor and council collectively, as
a body, oversee the operations of the city by the manager. Communities should avoid granting special
voting status to the mayor (e.g., vote on council only to make or break a tie). Such power will likely
impede rather than enhance the mayor's capacity to lead. Similarly, giving the mayor veto power in a
council-manager city cannot help but confuse his or her role with that of the executive mayor in a mayor-
council city.
No structural arrangement for government will ensure effective mayoral leadership. The person who
occupies the office must understand the nature of the job—its possibilities, interdependencies, and
limitations—and have the personal inclination, energy, and talent to exercise necessary leadership.
Without that, no amount of structural support will produce a leader. However, the method of selection and
the statement of responsibilities provided in the charter should help ensure the selection of a capable
person with recognized leadership abilities who will make a significant contribution to the operation of
the city.
Section 2.04. Compensation; Expenses.
The city council may determine the annual salary of the mayor and council members by ordinance, but no
ordinance increasing such salary shall become effective until the date of commencement of the terms of
council members elected at the next regular election. The mayor and council members shall receive their
actual and necessary expenses incurred in the performance of their duties of office.
Commentary.
Under the Model, council members are part-time officials and do not direct city departments. Council
salary level depends on a variety of factors specific to each community, including the part-time nature of
20
18
the position and the emphasis on policy-making rather than administration. The city should reimburse
council members for expenses incurred in performing their duties, e.g., travel to the state capital to testify
on behalf of the city. The Model rejects the setting of the actual amount of compensation in the charter
except for the salary of the first council after the charter goes into effect (see § 10.05(f)). The delay in the
effective date of any salary increases provides ample protection. The city should provide extra
compensation for the mayor because, in addition to regular responsibilities as a council member, the
mayor has intergovernmental, ceremonial, and city-related promotional responsibilities.
Section 2.05. Relationship to City Manager.
As explained in Article III, the city council hires the city manager to serve as the chief executive of the
city government and may terminate the appointment of the city manager at any time. It is an ongoing
responsibility of the city council to assure that the city manager and staff are accountable for their actions.
The council shall formally evaluate the city manager’s performance on an annual basis. The council shall
also monitor the policy proposals submitted by the city manager and the administrative actions taken by
the city manager and staff to ensure that the council’s expectations are being met and that acceptable
standards are being maintained.
Commentary.
Advocates of the strong mayor-council form of government claim that direct election of the chief
executive makes city government more accountable but using the electoral process for accountability is a
slow process and not necessarily available. The council-manager form has a chief executive who is
continuously accountable to the city council. It is necessary to wait up to four years until the next election
to hold the strong mayor accountable for poor performance, and accountability disappears in the mayor’s
final term. If a recall of the mayor is possible, this requires a large-scale collection of signatures on a
recall petition and is very disruptive to city. Typically, chief administrative officers in mayor-council
cities are neither independent nor accountable to the council. In contrast, the city manager in the council-
manager form is independent but continuously accountable. The manager’s performance should be
evaluated regularly by the council, and the manager can be removed by the council at any time if his/her
performance is not acceptable.
Section 2.06. Prohibitions.
(a) Holding Other Office. Except where authorized by law, no council member shall hold any other
elected public office during the term for which the member was elected to the council. No council
member shall hold any other city office or employment during the term for which the member was elected
to the council. No former council member shall hold any compensated appointive office or employment
with the city until one year after the expiration of the term for which the member was elected to the
council, unless granted a waiver by the Board of Ethics. Nothing in this section shall be construed to
prohibit the council from selecting any current or former council member to represent the city on the
governing board of any regional or other intergovernmental agency.
(b) Appointments and Removals. Neither the city council nor any of its members shall in any manner
control or demand the appointment or removal of any city administrative officer or employee whom the
city manager or any subordinate of the city manager is empowered to appoint, but the council may
express its views and fully and freely discuss with the city manager anything pertaining to appointment
and removal of such officers and employees.
21
19
(c) Interference with Administration. Except for the purpose of inquiries, and investigations under
§ 2.10, the council or its members shall deal with city officers and employees who are subject to the
direction and supervision of the city manager solely through the city manager, and neither the council nor
its members shall give orders to any such officer or employee, either publicly or privately.
Commentary.
(a)This provision prohibits council members from concurrently holding other elective office, such as
state legislator, as occurs in some states. Also prohibited is holding any other city office or employment
during one's council term or for one year after leaving office. These provisions are designed to avoid
conflict of interest situations. The charter is specific, however, that these prohibitions do not restrict any
current or former officeholder from service on the boards of regional or other intergovernmental agencies.
Such service is particularly valuable in accomplishing the objectives of intergovernmental cooperation.
(b)The prohibition against interference by council members in the appointment and removal of
employees and in the administration of city programs does not include the broad language of earlier
editions of the Model because it was considered too rigid and unrealistic. This provision, while expressing
the general policy of noninterference, does not exclude communication between council members and the
manager on questions of appointment and removal. The manager may seek advice from the council
regarding appointments. Council members are strictly prohibited from giving orders to city officers or
employees. However, the prohibition against interference with administration does not prevent council
members from making inquiries of department heads or employees for the purpose of obtaining
information needed by them in the discharge of their duties including response to constituent requests.
Information provided to one council member should be shared with the entire council as warranted. The
council and manager should define the parameters for such requests and establish reasonable boundaries.
In some cities, automated information systems make information on aspects of departmental operations
readily available to council members on computer terminals.
Section 2.07. Vacancies; Forfeiture of Office; Filling of Vacancies.
(a)Vacancies. The office of a council member shall become vacant upon the member's death,
resignation, or removal from office or forfeiture of office in any manner authorized by law.
(b) Forfeiture of Office. A council member shall forfeit that office if the council member:
(1)Fails to meet the residency requirements,
(2)Violates any express prohibition of this charter,
(3)Is convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude, or
(4)Fails to attend three consecutive regular meetings of the council without being excused
by the council.
(c)Filling of Vacancies. A vacancy in the city council shall be filled for the remainder of the unexpired
term, if any, at the next regular election following not less than sixty days upon the occurrence of the
vacancy, but the council by a majority vote of all its remaining members shall appoint a qualified person
to fill the vacancy until the person elected to serve the remainder of the unexpired term takes office. If the
council fails to do so within thirty days following the occurrence of the vacancy, the election authorities
shall call a special election to fill the vacancy, to be held not sooner than ninety days and not later than
120 days following the occurrence of the vacancy, and to be otherwise governed by law. Notwithstanding
the requirement in § 2.12(c), if at any time the membership of the council is reduced to less than ______,
22
20
the remaining members may by majority action appoint additional members to raise the membership to
______.
Commentary.
The section specifies the events or conditions, which create a vacancy, the grounds for forfeiture of office,
and the manner by which the council shall fill vacancies.
Subsection (b)(3) requires forfeiture of office for crimes involving “moral turpitude.” This is a legal
standard that in most jurisdictions means the crime – felony or misdemeanor – violates community
standards of morality and involves an element of knowing intent by the perpetrator. Court findings
include In re Flannery, 334 Or. 224 (2002) (misrepresenting address in renewing driver license to obtain
valid license to rent a car was not a crime involving moral turpitude); Klontz v. Ashcroft, 37 Fed. Appx.
259 (9th Cir. 2002) (petty theft and grand theft are both crimes of moral turpitude); Antorietto v. Regents
of the University of California, 2002 WL 1265552 (Cal. App. 4 Dist. June 7, 2002) (misuse of university
funds and fraudulent diversion of donor funds intended for the university are crimes that involve moral
turpitude). Another approach focuses on felonies, as in Kansas City‘s charter, which reads: ―No member
of the council shall, during the term for which he is elected, be found guilty or enter a plea of guilty or
nolo contendere to a felony under the laws of the United States or of any state, even if subsequently
followed by the suspended imposition of the sentence. The council shall temporarily fill vacancies until
the next regular election, when the voters will fill such vacancies for the remainder of the term (unless
that election occurs within sixty days of the vacancy, in which case the candidates would have insufficient
time to file). The provision calls for a special election if the council fails to fill a vacancy within thirty
days. This provision should ensure that the council will act, but in the event of a deadlock a special
election will resolve the situation.
Finally, the section provides for filling vacancies by council action even if the membership falls below the
quorum otherwise required for council action by § 2.12(c).
Section 2.08. Judge of Qualifications. The city council shall be the judge of the election and
qualifications of its members, and of the grounds for forfeiture of their office. In order to exercise these
powers, the council shall have power to subpoena witnesses, administer oaths and require the production
of evidence. A member charged with conduct constituting grounds for forfeiture of office shall be entitled
to a public hearing on demand and notice of such hearing shall be published in one or more newspapers of
general circulation in the city at least one week in advance of the hearing.
Commentary.
This section makes council the judge of qualifications for office and of grounds for forfeiture. It provides
procedural safeguards to protect a member charged with conduct constituting grounds for forfeiture. The
provision authorizing the council to set additional standards for the conduct of its members empowers the
council to impose on itself the highest possible ethical standards.
Section 2.09. City Clerk. The city council or the city manager shall appoint an officer of the city who
shall have the title of city clerk. The city clerk shall give notice of council meetings to its members and
the public, keep the journal of its proceedings and perform such other duties as are assigned by this
charter or by the council or by state law.
23
21
Commentary.
See §§ 2.16 and 2.17 for other duties assigned to the city clerk. In a number of states, certain statutory
duties may be assigned to the city clerk, even in cities operating with their own charters.
Section 2.10. Investigations. The city council may make investigations into the affairs of the city and the
conduct of any city department, office, or agency and for this purpose may subpoena witnesses,
administer oaths, take testimony, and require the production of evidence. Failure or refusal to obey a
lawful order issued in the exercise of these powers by the council shall be a misdemeanor punishable by a
fine of not more than $______, or by imprisonment for not more than ______ or both.
Commentary.
This section gives the council, but not the manager, the power to make investigations. The manager has
the power to appoint, remove, and suspend officers, but it is inappropriate for the manager to have the
power to subpoena witnesses and compel production of evidence.
Section 2.11. Independent Audit. The city council shall provide for an independent annual audit of all
city accounts and may provide for more frequent audits as it deems necessary. Such audits shall be carried
out in accordance with § 5.12.
Commentary.
The necessity for annual independent audits of the city's financial affairs has long been accepted. This
section authorizes and charges the council to conduct them.
Section 2.12. Procedure
(a) Meetings. The council shall meet regularly at least once in every month at such times and places as
the council may prescribe by rule. Special meetings may be held on the call of the mayor or of ______ or
more members and, whenever practicable, upon no less than twelve hours’ notice to each member. Except
as allowed by state law, all meetings shall be public; however, the council may recess for the purpose of
discussing in a closed or executive session limited to its own membership any matter which would tend to
defame or prejudice the character or reputation of any person, if the general subject matter for
consideration is expressed in the motion calling for such session and final action on such motion is not
taken by the council until the matter is placed on the agenda.
(b) Rules and Journal. The city council shall determine its own rules and order of business and shall
provide for keeping a journal of its proceedings. This journal shall be a public record.
(c) Voting. Voting, except on procedural motions, shall be by roll call and the ayes and nays shall be
recorded in the journal. ______ members of the council shall constitute a quorum, but a smaller number
may adjourn from time to time and may compel the attendance of absent members in the manner and
subject to the penalties prescribed by the rules of the council. No action of the council, except as
otherwise provided in the preceding sentence and in § 2.07(c), shall be valid or binding unless adopted by
the affirmative vote of ______ or more members of the council.
Commentary.
This section sets forth what are, for the most part, standardized and well accepted procedural rules to
govern the official action of the council. The frequency of meetings can, of course, be suited to the needs
of the particular city. The section contains the important, standard protection that meetings must be public
24
22
and that a journal of proceedings be kept as a public record. Most states have open meeting laws which
specify the circumstances when closed or executive sessions may be held; such meetings are sometimes
necessary for effective council functioning. This charter and state law contain ample safeguards to assure
open meetings. All council actions require majority vote, except actions to adjourn, to compel attendance
of members in the absence of a quorum, and to appoint additional members if the membership falls below
a majority of the total authorized membership as provided in § 2.07(c).
Section 2.13. Action Requiring an Ordinance.
In addition to other acts required by law or by specific provision of this charter to be done by ordinance,
those acts of the city council shall be by ordinance which:
(1) Adopt or amend an administrative code or establish, alter, or abolish any city department,
office, or agency;
(2) Provide for a fine or other penalty or establish a rule or regulation for violation of which
a fine or other penalty is imposed;
(3) Levy taxes;
(4) Grant, renew, or extend a franchise;
(5) Regulate the rate charged for its services by a public utility;
(6) Authorize the borrowing of money;
(7) Convey or lease or authorize the conveyance or lease of any lands of the city;
(8) Regulate land use and development;
(9) Amend or repeal any ordinance previously adopted; or
(10) Adopt, with or without amendment, ordinances proposed under the initiative power. Acts
other than those referred to in the preceding sentence may be done either by ordinance or
by resolution.
Commentary.
This section assures that the enumerated types of council action be taken only after compliance with all
the procedural safeguards required for passage of an ordinance by the succeeding sections.
Other subjects requiring an ordinance are not mentioned here because the requirement is specifically
stated elsewhere in the charter. These include adoption of codes of technical regulations (§ 2.16),
appropriation and revenue ordinances (§ 5.06), supplemental and emergency appropriations and reduction
of appropriations (§ 5.07), and creation of a charter commission or proposal of charter amendments (§
9.01). Council may act via ordinance or resolution on matters other than those enumerated in this section
or as required by law or by specific provision in the charter to be by ordinance. This does not preclude
motions relating to matters of council procedure, which may involve even less formality than resolutions.
Section 2.14. Ordinances in General
(a) Form. Every proposed ordinance shall be introduced in writing and in the form required for final
adoption. No ordinance shall contain more than one subject, which shall be clearly expressed in its title.
The enacting clause shall be "The city of ______ hereby ordains . . ." Any ordinance which repeals or
25
23
amends an existing ordinance or part of the city code shall set out in full the ordinance, sections or
subsections to be repealed or amended, and shall indicate matters to be omitted by enclosing it in brackets
or by strikeout type and shall indicate new matters by underscoring or by italics.
(b) Procedure. Any member at any regular or special meeting of the council may introduce an ordinance.
Upon introduction of any ordinance, the city clerk shall distribute a copy to each council member and to
the city manager, shall file a reasonable number of copies in the office of the city clerk and such other
public places as the council may designate, and shall publish the ordinance together with a notice setting
out the time and place for a public hearing thereon and for its consideration by the council.
The public hearing shall follow the publication by at least seven days, may be held separately or in
connection with a regular or special council meeting and may be adjourned from time to time; all persons
interested shall have an opportunity to be heard. After the hearing, the council may adopt the ordinance
with or without amendment or reject it, but if it is amended as to any matter of substance, the council may
not adopt it until the ordinance or its amended sections have been subjected to all the procedures herein
before required in the case of a newly introduced ordinance. As soon as practicable after adoption, the
clerk shall have the ordinance and a notice of its adoption published and available at a reasonable price.
(c) Effective Date. Except as otherwise provided in this charter, every adopted ordinance shall become
effective at the expiration of 30 days after adoption or at any later date specified therein.
(d) "Publish" Defined. As used in this section, the term "publish" means to print in the contemporary
means of information sharing, which includes but is not limited to, one or more newspapers of general
circulation in the city, and, if available, in a web site: (1) the ordinance or a brief summary thereof, and
(2) the places where copies of it have been filed and the times when they are available for public
inspection and purchase at a reasonable price.
Commentary.
This section dispenses with the unnecessary and cumbersome requirements of a full reading of all
ordinances and publication of their full text both before and after adoption. Distribution of a copy to each
council member obviates the need for a full reading. Permitting the printing of a brief summary, together
with notice of the times and places where copies are available for public inspection, simplifies
publication.
Further simplification occurs in §§ 2.15 and 2.16, which contain special provisions for expeditious
handling of emergency ordinances and for adoption by reference of standard codes of technical
regulations. The section retains the basic safeguards of a public hearing following notice by publication,
and a second publication with notice of adoption. It does not go so far as charters that dispense with
publication or that permit adoption at the same meeting at which a non-emergency ordinance is
introduced. It retains protective features deemed necessary for full and careful consideration. Section 2.15
provides sufficient leeway for emergency situations.
Section 2.15. Emergency Ordinances.
To meet a public emergency affecting life, health, property or the public peace, the city council may adopt
one or more emergency ordinances, but such ordinances may not levy taxes, grant, renew or extend a
franchise, regulate the rate charged by any public utility for its services or authorize the borrowing of
money except as provided in § 5.07(b). An emergency ordinance shall be introduced in the form and
manner prescribed for ordinances generally, except that it shall be plainly designated as an emergency
ordinance and shall contain, after the enacting clause, a declaration stating that an emergency exists and
26
24
describing it in clear and specific terms. An emergency ordinance may be adopted with or without
amendment or rejected at the meeting at which it is introduced, but the affirmative vote of at least ______
members shall be required for adoption.
After its adoption, the ordinance shall be published and printed as prescribed for other adopted
ordinances. It shall become effective upon adoption or at such later time as it may specify. Every
emergency ordinance except one made pursuant to § 5.07(b) shall automatically stand repealed as of the
sixty-first day following the date on which it was adopted, but this shall not prevent re-enactment of the
ordinance in the manner specified in this section if the emergency still exists. An emergency ordinance
may also be repealed by adoption of a repealing ordinance in the same manner specified in this section for
adoption of emergency ordinances.
Commentary.
To facilitate timely action, the charter permits an extraordinary majority to introduce and adopt such
ordinances at the same meeting. Ordinances passed pursuant to this section may also have an immediate
effective date.
Section 2.16. Codes of Technical Regulations.
The city council may adopt any standard code of technical regulations by reference thereto in an adopting
ordinance. The procedure and requirements governing such an adopting ordinance shall be as prescribed
for ordinances generally except that:
(1) The requirements of § 2.14 for distribution and filing of copies of the ordinance shall be
construed to include copies of the code of technical regulations as well as of the adopting
ordinance, and
(2) A copy of each adopted code of technical regulations as well as of the adopting ordinance
shall be authenticated and recorded by the city clerk pursuant to § 2.17(a).
Copies of any adopted code of technical regulations shall be made available by the city clerk for
distribution or for purchase at a reasonable price.
Commentary
This provision permits adoption of standard and often lengthy, detailed, and technical regulations, such as
building and sanitary codes, by an ordinance which simply incorporates and adopts the code by reference.
Publication of the adopting ordinance satisfies publication requirements. The adopting ordinance should
indicate the nature of the code. The council is not required to include all such technical codes in the
general city code pursuant to § 2.16. This approach minimizes burden and expense while at the same time
preserving the essential safeguards of the general ordinance procedure of § 2.13.
Section 2.17. Authentication and Recording; Codification; Printing of Ordinances and Resolutions.
(a) Authentication and Recording. The city clerk shall authenticate by signing and shall record in full in
a properly indexed book kept for the purpose all ordinances and resolutions adopted by the city council.
(b) Codification. Within three years after adoption of this charter and at least every ten years thereafter,
the city council shall provide for the preparation of a general codification of all city ordinances and
resolutions having the force and effect of law. The general codification shall be adopted by the council by
ordinance and shall be published, together with this charter and any amendments thereto, pertinent
27
25
provisions of the constitution and other laws of the State of ______, and such codes of technical
regulations and other rules and regulations as the council may specify. This compilation shall be known
and cited officially as the ______ city code. Copies of the code shall be furnished to city officers, placed
in libraries, public offices, and, if available, in a web site for free public reference and made available for
purchase by the public at a reasonable price fixed by the council.
(c) Printing of Ordinances and Resolutions. The city council shall cause each ordinance and resolution
having the force and effect of law and each amendment to this charter to be printed promptly following its
adoption, and the printed ordinances, resolutions and charter amendments shall be distributed or sold to
the public at reasonable prices as fixed by the council. Following publication of the first ______ city code
and at all times thereafter, the ordinances, resolutions and charter amendments shall be printed in
substantially the same style as the code currently in effect and shall be suitable in form for integration
therein. The council shall make such further arrangements as it deems desirable with respect to
reproduction and distribution of any current changes in or additions to the provisions of the constitution
and other laws of the state of ______, or the codes of technical regulations and other rules and regulations
included in the code.
Commentary.
Subsections (a) and (c) of this section state essential procedures for maintaining legally authenticated
records of all ordinances and resolutions and for making them available to the public. The merits of the
general codification provided for in subsection (b) speak for themselves. The Model provides for
inclusion of pertinent parts of the constitution and state statutes, thus envisioning a city code to which
people may turn for all state and local legislation governing the city. This contrasts to the situation still
existing in many cities where much of this legislation, particularly state laws of limited application, are
nowhere collected and are often out of print, unavailable, or difficult to find.
28
Government Characteristics
Anaconda-
Deer Lodge
Butte-Silver
Bow Belgrade Billings Bozeman Columbia
Falls Great Falls Havre Helena Kalispell Lewistown Livingston Missoula Polson West
Yellowston Whitefish
Partisan/Nonpartisan (P/NP)NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP
At-Large/Wards (AL/W)5 Districts 12 Districts 3 Wards 5 Wards At-Large At-Large At-Large 4 Wards At-Large 4 Wards 3 Wards + 1 AL At-Large 6 Wards 3 Wards At-Large At-Large
Council Terms 4 Years 4 Years 4 Years 4 Years 4 Years 4 Years 4 Years 4 Years 4 Years 4 Years 4 Years 4 Years 4 Years 4 Years 4 Years 4 Years
Number of Council Members + Mayor/PO as
part of Legislative Branch 5 12 6+M 10+M 4+M 6+M 4+M 8 4+M 9+M 7/PO*5/PO*12 6+M 5/M*6+M
Mayor/Presiding Officer (CEO/Mayor/PO)CEO CEO Mayor Mayor Mayor Mayor Mayor Mayor Mayor Mayor PO PO Mayor Mayor Mayor Mayor
Mayor/Deputy Mayor Split Term (Y/N)No No No No Yes No No No No No No No No No No No
Mayor/P.O. Term of Office 4 yr 4 yr 2 yr 4 yr 2+2 4 yr 2 yr 4 yr 4 yr 4 yr 4 yr 4 yr 4 yr 4 yr 1 yr 4 yr
Com-Mgr/Com-Ex Structure Com-Ex Com-Ex Com-Mgr Com-Mgr Com-Mgr Com-Mgr Com-Mgr Com-Ex Com-Mgr Com-Mgr Com-Mgr Com-Mgr Com-Ex Com-Mgr Com-Mgr Com-Mgr
SG Charter/General Gov Charter Charter Charter Charter Charter Gen Gov Charter Charter Charter Gen Gov Charter Gen Gov Charter Charter Charter Charter
EO Vacancy**120 days 60 days 60 Days 30 days 30 days 30 days 30 days**30 days**30 days**30 days 30 days 30 days 30 days 30 days 30 days 30 days
Police Chief/Sheriff (Elected/Hired by Exec)Elected Elected Hired Hired Hired Hired Hired Hired Hired Hired Hired Hired Hired Hired Hired Hired
City/County Attorney Elected Elected Hired Hired Hired Hired Hired Hired Hired Hired Hired Hired Hired Hired Hired Hired
Clerk Elected Elected Hired Hired Hired Hired Hired Hired Hired Hired Hired Hired Hired Hired Hired Hired
Treasurer Selection Elected Elected Hired Hired Hired Hired Hired Hired Hired Hired Hired Hired Elected Hired Hired Hired
*Mayor is elected by the council from its membership**Charter states "as may be provided by law", does not specify a timeline (and MCA defaults) or the commission has passed an ordiance outlining a specific timeline for filling an EO position.
29
CITY COMMISSION NOTES
SUMMARY OF CITY COMMISSION DISCUSSION:
October 21, 2025 – City Commission Work Session
Topic: Current Form, Powers, and Structure of City Government
Note:
This document is a summary of discussion themes and perspectives expressed by City Commissioners during the
October 21, 2025 work session. It is not a verbatim transcript and does not represent exact or complete statements by
individual commissioners. The official record of the meeting is the video recording.
1. Improving the City Commission’s Ability to Serve and Represent Bozeman
Commissioners generally emphasized the growing demands of the role, particularly in relation to time commitments,
compensation, and expectations.
Key themes included:
The time commitment of the role has increased significantly relative to compensation.
A need for clearer definition of roles and expectations, including whether the position should be considered part-
time or full-time.
Challenges related to meeting schedules, preparation demands, and additional expectations tied to board and
neighborhood involvement.
Interest in improved administrative support, such as assistance with scheduling.
Broad agreement on the importance of clear lines between governance and administration, with continued support
for the City Manager form of government.
Discussion of neighborhood associations as a potential mechanism for improving representation and feedback.
2. Election Structure: At-Large vs. District (Ward-Based) Representation
Commissioners discussed the potential benefits and challenges of moving from at-large elections to district-based or
hybrid models.
Key points raised:
Ward-based systems were viewed by some as a natural evolution for a growing city.
Benefits identified included:
Stronger geographic representation.
Increased connection between commissioners and neighborhoods.
Reduced barriers for candidates compared to at-large campaigns.
Concerns included:
Potential for uncontested or underrepresented districts.
Boundary drawing complexities, including rebalancing wards over time.
The availability of qualified and willing candidates in multiple districts.
Neighborhood associations were frequently cited as potential building blocks for ward-based representation.
Several commissioners expressed skepticism toward hybrid models, noting potential complexity and uneven
representation.
|
30
3. Scope of the Commissioner Role and Commission Size
The discussion highlighted evolving expectations of commissioners and the appropriate size of the City Commission.
Major themes included:
Support from several commissioners for expanding the Commission, with seven members frequently cited as a
reasonable number.
Emphasis on the need for a clearly defined “job description” for commissioners.
Recognition that the Mayor role carries significantly greater demands, including preparation, board liaison work,
external partnerships, and intergovernmental relations.
Ideas discussed included:
A structure of six ward-based commissioners plus a Mayor elected at-large.
Maintaining commissioners as non–full-time positions while recognizing the Mayor role as potentially full-time.
Concerns were raised about expanding too far and creating an unwieldy governing body.
4. Mayor and Deputy Mayor Structure
Commissioners discussed the current charter requirement that an elected Mayor serves two years as Deputy Mayor
followed by two years as Mayor.
Key observations:
The current structure was described as confusing for the public.
Several commissioners questioned the effectiveness and clarity of the existing Deputy Mayor arrangement.
Alternatives discussed included:
Eliminating the current Deputy Mayor structure.
Allowing the Commission to select a Deputy Mayor or Vice Chair.
Assigning the role based on electoral outcomes (e.g., top vote-getter).
Some commissioners noted the value of continuity and training that the current system provides, particularly during
transitions.
General agreement emerged that any future structure should prioritize clarity, continuity, and public understanding.
5. City Manager Form of Government and Staff Communication
The Commission discussed the strengths and limitations of the current Commission–Manager form of government.
Key themes included:
Strong overall support for retaining a professional City Manager hired by the full Commission.
Benefits cited:
Professional expertise and institutional continuity.
Clear separation between political governance and administrative operations.
Protection of staff from political pressures.
Challenges discussed:
Perceptions that the City Manager holds too much power.
Balancing access to staff expertise with the charter’s communication restrictions.
Commissioners emphasized the importance of:
Clearly codified rules governing access to staff.
Accountability mechanisms for the City Manager.
Stability in leadership to attract and retain high-caliber staff.
|
31
1
LIFTING ALL VOICES
FOR LOCAL
GOVERNMENT
City Employee Survey
Final Results
Survey Results Review | January 22, 2026
City of Bozeman, MT
32
2
Overview
Key Components
Review of some basic components related to the employee survey
176 Total surveys completed
Reminder email to sent Monday, January 12th
Survey was open January 5 through January 15thth
THE SURVEY FEATURED A
COMBINATION OF QUESTIONS
RELATED MORE SPECIFICALLY TO
HOW LOCAL GOVERNMENT
STRUCTURE AFFECTS THE WORK
OF EMPLOYEES, AS WELL AS
MANY OF THE SAME QUESTIONS
TO THE COMMUNITY SURVEY
33
3
CITY RESIDENCYMost respondents lived within city limits.DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE
RESPONDENTS WERE PRIMARILY CITY RESIDENTS
WORK CATEGORYThe category of infrastructure and Utilities wasthe top choice.LENGTH OF EMPLOYMENT A variety of responses in this category020406080100Within Bozeman city limits
Outside city limits
0 10 20 30 40 50
Infrastructure and Utilities
Internal Administration
Public Safety
Community and Resident Services
Planning and Development
Other
0 20 40 60 80
Less than 5 years
5-10 years
More than 10 years
0 20 40 60 80 100
Yes
No
SUPERVISORY/MANAGEMENT ROLEMost respondents were not in managementroles.
34
4
Strongly
Disagree Strongly
Agree
Community Employee
1 2 3 4
I stay informed about local government issues in Bozeman.
I understand who leads and makes decisions for our city.
I am confident in the current structure of city government in Bozeman.
Structure enables clear roles, responsibilities, and reporting lines for city employees.
Structure supports efficient delivery of services in my department
CURRENT STATE PERCEPTIONS
RESPONDENTS FEEL INFORMED ABOUT THE CITY, BUT HAVE LOWER CONFIDENCE AND MIXED PERCPETIONS OF STRUCTURE
Understanding & AttitudesSurvey respondents rated items on a scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5(strongly agree).
35
5
LEADERSHIP PRIORITIES
TOP PRIORITIES FOR EMPLOYEES INCLUDE ACCOUNTABILITY, TRANSPARENCY, EFFICIENT ADMINISTRATION, AND STABLEADMINISTRATION
EMPLOYEE SURVEY Survey respondents voted on their top 3 priorities forhow they want the City of Bozeman leadership tofunction going forward.
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Accountable Leadership
Transparent Leadership
Responsive Administration
Fiscally-Responsible Model of Government
Democratic Representation
Efficient Administration
Stable Administration
Term-Limited Leaders
Visible Leaders
Other
COMMUNITY SURVEYSurvey respondents voted on their top 3 prioritiesfor how they want the City of Bozeman leadership tofunction going forward.
0 20 40 60 80 100
Accountable Leadership
Transparent Leadership
Responsive Administration
Fiscally-Responsible Model of Government
Democratic Representation
Efficient Administration
Stable Administration
Term-Limited Leaders
Visible Leaders
Other
36
6
IMPACT
WE ASKED ABOUT THE DAY-TO-DAY IMPACT OF VARIOUS ROLES
THE QUESTION: On a scale of 1-5, what level of impact do each of the following roles have on your day-to-day work? When responding,please focus on the roles, responsibilities, and structure of city leadership positions rather than the individuals currentlyserving in those roles.
No
Impact
Very Significant
Impact
Average Employee Rating
1 2 3 4 5
Mayor
Deputy Mayor
City Commissioners
City Manager
Neighborhood Councils
City Boards
2.2
1.97
2.7
3.87
1.91
2.17
37
COMMUNITY SURVEYSurvey respondents selected howinvolved the mayor should be in dailycity operations.
7
MAYOR FEEDBACK
PUBLIC GENERALLY SUPPORTING A HYBRID EXECUTIVE MODEL, EMPLOYEES SUPPORT LEGISLATIVE LEADER ROLE
Hybrid Executive
33.8%
Legislative Leader
31.3%
Executive Leader
18.5%
Hybrid Legislative
13.7%
Hybrid Executive: Mayor handles some
executive tasks, but City Manager still
manages most daily operations
Legislative Leader: Mayor leads
commission meetings and represents city,
but does not run departments (current form)
Executive Leader: Mayor elected
separately, directly manages city operations
Hybrid Legislative: Mayor breaks ties in
commission meetings, but does not manage
day-to-day governmentLegislative Leader
60%
Hybrid Legislative
21.2%
Hybrid Executive
12.1%
Executive Leader
4.2%
EMPLOYEE SURVEYSurvey respondents selected howinvolved the mayor should be in dailycity operations.
SURVEY OPTIONS
38
8
EMPLOYEE SURVEYSurvey respondents selected whetherthe city should retain a professionalcity manager.
CITY MANAGER FEEDBACK
PUBLIC WANTS GREATER OVERSIGHT AND BALANCE OF POWERS, EMPLOYEES WANT AUTHORITY WITH CITY MANAGER
Yes, Full Executive Authority
72%
Yes, Reduced powers
18.9%
Unsure
3.7%
Yes, Reduced Powers: City manager
handles some operations, while the
Mayor takes on more authority
Yes, Full Executive Authority: City
Manager runs all operations; Mayor is
mostly legislatively focused (current
form)
No, Mayor Executive Authority:
The structure should allow the Mayor
to hold all the executive authority
Unsure
Yes, Reduced powers
50.5%
Yes, Full Executive Authority
34.6%
No, Mayor Executive Authority
11.7%
COMMUNITY SURVEY Survey respondents selected whetherthe city should retain a professionalcity manager.
SURVEY OPTIONS
39
ELECT ADDITIONAL OFFICIALS
COMMUNITY RESPONDENTS SHOW SOME INTEREST IN THE IDEA OF ELECTING ADDITIONAL OFFICIALS, BUT EMPLOYEESSHOW OPPOSITION TO ELECTING MORE OFFICIALS COMMUNITY SURVEY
0 50 100 150 200 250
Yes, I would support electing more city officials
No, I would prefer these positions remain appointed
Not sure / Need more information
EMPLOYEE SURVEY
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Yes, I would support electing more city officials
No, I would prefer these positions remain appointed
Not sure / Need more information
How the Question WasFramed:
Survey respondents selectedwhether they would support theidea of having additional cityofficials elected by voters. Forexample, in some cities, positionssuch as City Clerk, City Treasurer,or City Attorney are elected.
40
0 20 40 60 80 100
Commissioners live in district, Voters only from district
Commissioners live in district, Voters from across the city
Commissioners live across city, Voters only from district
No preference
--
10 20 30 40 50
1- Strongly Disagree
2- Disagree
3- Neutral
4- Agree
5- Strongly Agree
23
20
45
45
31 No
53.4%
Unsure
23.9%
Yes
22.7%
10
GEOGRAPHIC VS. CITY-WIDE COMMISSIONERSSurvey respondents rated their preference on a scalefrom 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).
CITY COMMISSION FEEDBACK
RESPONDENTS SHOW SOME PREFERENCE FOR GEOGRAPHIC REPRESENTATION BUT MIXED OPINIONS ON EXPANSION
POTENTIAL GEOGRAPHIC RULESEmployee respondents also considered IF geographic-basedcommissioners were used, which rules would make the most sense.
I believe Bozeman should prioritize geographic district-
based representation rather than total city-wide votes for
commissioners.
COMMISSION EXPANSIONSurvey respondents also selected whether they thought Bozemanshould expand its City Commission beyond 5 members.
Employees Survey
No
41.7%
Yes
33.7%
Unsure
24.6%
Community Survey
41
11
ADVISORY BOARDS & NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCILS FEEDBACK
OVERALL, RESPONDENTS SUPPORTED THESE GROUPS SERVING ADVISORY ROLES WITH SOME SHARED INFLUENCE
ADVISORY BOARDS & NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCILSSurvey respondents selected what they thought should bethe “main role” of City Boards and Neighborhood Councils.
BOARD/COUNCIL INFLUENCESurvey respondents selected how much influence theythought these entities should have on city decisions.
0 20 40 60 80 100
e policies, limited decision-making power
to Commission, not make final decisions
power, approve or block certain actions
Unsure
Share input and shape policies,
limited decision-making power
Provide advice to Commission, not
make final decisions (current form)
Formal decision-making power,
approve or block certain actions
Unsure
0 20 40 60 80 100
Shared influence
Advisory only
Strong influence
Unsure
Shared Influence (Boards help set
priorities and may have authority in
certain areas)
Advisory Only (Commission may
consider input, but makes all decisions-
current form)
Strong Influence (Boards can veto or
block decisions made by Commission)
Unsure
42
12
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
KEY TAKEAWAYS
Summarizing the broad feedback gathered from the employee survey, four items stand out:
Understanding the uniqueness of each group of respondents with each survey
Some similarities and some differences between the employee and community surveys
Many employees have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo
Commissioner Survey and Board Survey should add some additional context
THE ROLE OF THE STUDY
COMMISSION WILL BE TO TAKE
THIS DATA AND ADDITIONAL
DATA TO START FOCUSING ON
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE
FINAL REPORT
43
From:Brian Guyer
To:Mike Maas
Cc:Government Review Secretary
Subject:RE: Bozeman AMI
Date:Thursday, January 22, 2026 4:49:54 PM
Attachments:HOME_IncomeLmts_State_MT_2025.pdf
Mike –
Attached are the 2025 HOME (HUD) Income limits for the state of Montana. They aren’t in the same format as the table below but if
you extrapolate from the data in the document it means that 100% of AMI for a single person in 2025 in Bozeman is $83,333 and the
AMI for a family of four is $119,000. Up from $76,300 and $109,000 respectively.
For reference the 2024 AMI was as follows:
2024 HUD Income Limits – City of Bozeman
FY 2024
Income Limit
Area
Median
Family
Income
Income Limit
Category Number of Persons in Household
Bozeman, MT $109,000
Area Median
Income 1 2 3 4
30% AMI $22,900 $26,200 $29,450 $32,700
40% AMI $30,550 $34,900 $39,250 $43,600
50% AMI $38,150 $43,600 $49,050 $54,500
60% AMI $45,800 $52,350 $58,900 $65,400
70% AMI $53,450 $61,050 $68,700 $76,300
80% AMI $61,050 $69,800 $78,500 $87,200
90% AMI $68,700 $78,500 $88,300 $98,100
100% AMI $76,300 $87,200 $98,100 $109,000
120% AMI $91,600 $104,650 $117,750 $130,800
130% AMI $99,200 $113,400 $127,550 $141,700
140% AMI $106,850 $122,100 $137,350 $152,600
150% AMI $114,450 $130,800 $147,150 $163,500
200% AMI $152,600 $174,400 $196,200 $218,000
From: Mike Maas <MMaas@BOZEMAN.NET>
Sent: Friday, January 16, 2026 12:47 PM
To: Brian Guyer <Brian.Guyer@bozemanmt.gov>
44
Cc: Government Review Secretary <GovReviewSec@BOZEMAN.NET>
Subject: Bozeman AMI
Good afternoon,
Last night the City Study Commission asked that I gather some information for them; one of the pieces of data they would like is the current
Bozeman (and Gallatin County) AMI levels.
Can you please provide that for me?
Thanks,
Mike Maas, MPA
City of Bozeman | 121 N. Rouse Ave. | Bozeman, MT 59715
406.582.2321
Pronouns: he/him/his
Have Questions? Ask BZN
45
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HUD
STATE:MONTANA --------------------- FY2025 ADJUSTED HOME INCOME LIMITS ---------------------
PROGRAM 1 PERSON 2 PERSON 3 PERSON 4 PERSON 5 PERSON 6 PERSON 7 PERSON 8 PERSON
Billings, MT HUD Metro FMR Area 30% LIMITS 20450 23350 26250 29150 31500 33850 36150 38500
VERY LOW INCOME 34000 38850 43700 48550 52450 56350 60250 64100
60% LIMITS 40800 46620 52440 58260 62940 67620 72300 76920 LOW INCOME 54400 62200 69950 77700 83950 90150 96350 102600
Stillwater County, MT HUD Metro FMR Area 30% LIMITS 23100 26400 29700 32950 35600 38250 40900 43500
VERY LOW INCOME 38500 44000 49500 54950 59350 63750 68150 72550
60% LIMITS 46200 52800 59400 65940 71220 76500 81780 87060
LOW INCOME 61550 70350 79150 87900 94950 102000 109000 116050
Bozeman, MT MSA
30% LIMITS 25000 28600 32150 35700 38600 41450 44300 47150
VERY LOW INCOME 41650 47600 53550 59500 64300 69050 73800 78550 60% LIMITS 49980 57120 64260 71400 77160 82860 88560 94260
LOW INCOME 66650 76200 85700 95200 102850 110450 118050 125700
Great Falls, MT MSA
30% LIMITS 19100 21800 24550 27250 29450 31650 33800 36000
VERY LOW INCOME 31800 36350 40900 45400 49050 52700 56300 59950
60% LIMITS 38160 43620 49080 54480 58860 63240 67560 71940
LOW INCOME 50900 58150 65400 72650 78500 84300 90100 95900
Broadwater County, MT HUD Metro FMR Area
30% LIMITS 19750 22550 25350 28150 30450 32700 34950 37200 VERY LOW INCOME 32850 37550 42250 46900 50650 54450 58200 61900
60% LIMITS 39420 45060 50700 56280 60780 65340 69840 74280
LOW INCOME 52500 60000 67500 75000 81000 87000 93000 99000
Jefferson County, MT HUD Metro FMR Area
30% LIMITS 21950 25050 28200 31300 33850 36350 38850 41350 VERY LOW INCOME 36500 41700 46950 52150 56350 60500 64700 68850
60% LIMITS 43800 50040 56340 62580 67620 72600 77640 82620
LOW INCOME 58450 66800 75150 83450 90150 96850 103500 110200
Lewis and Clark County, MT HUD Metro FMR Area
30% LIMITS 22500 25700 28900 32100 34700 37250 39850 42400
VERY LOW INCOME 37450 42800 48150 53500 57800 62100 66350 70650
60% LIMITS 44940 51360 57780 64200 69360 74520 79620 84780 LOW INCOME 59950 68500 77050 85600 92450 99300 106150 113000
Missoula, MT HUD Metro FMR Area 30% LIMITS 20700 23650 26600 29550 31950 34300 36650 39050
VERY LOW INCOME 34500 39400 44300 49250 53200 57150 61100 65000
60% LIMITS 41400 47280 53160 59100 63840 68580 73320 78000
LOW INCOME 55200 63050 70950 78800 85150 91450 97750 104050
Effective: June 1, 2025 Page 1 of 7
46
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HUD
STATE:MONTANA --------------------- FY2025 ADJUSTED HOME INCOME LIMITS ---------------------
PROGRAM 1 PERSON 2 PERSON 3 PERSON 4 PERSON 5 PERSON 6 PERSON 7 PERSON 8 PERSON
Mineral County, MT HUD Metro FMR Area 30% LIMITS 18350 21000 23600 26200 28300 30400 32500 34600
VERY LOW INCOME 30600 34950 39300 43650 47150 50650 54150 57650
60% LIMITS 36720 41940 47160 52380 56580 60780 64980 69180 LOW INCOME 48900 55900 62900 69850 75450 81050 86650 92250
Beaverhead County, MT 30% LIMITS 18350 21000 23600 26200 28300 30400 32500 34600
VERY LOW INCOME 30600 34950 39300 43650 47150 50650 54150 57650
60% LIMITS 36720 41940 47160 52380 56580 60780 64980 69180
LOW INCOME 48900 55900 62900 69850 75450 81050 86650 92250
Big Horn County, MT
30% LIMITS 18350 21000 23600 26200 28300 30400 32500 34600
VERY LOW INCOME 30600 34950 39300 43650 47150 50650 54150 57650 60% LIMITS 36720 41940 47160 52380 56580 60780 64980 69180
LOW INCOME 48900 55900 62900 69850 75450 81050 86650 92250
Blaine County, MT
30% LIMITS 18350 21000 23600 26200 28300 30400 32500 34600
VERY LOW INCOME 30600 34950 39300 43650 47150 50650 54150 57650
60% LIMITS 36720 41940 47160 52380 56580 60780 64980 69180
LOW INCOME 48900 55900 62900 69850 75450 81050 86650 92250
Carter County, MT
30% LIMITS 18350 21000 23600 26200 28300 30400 32500 34600 VERY LOW INCOME 30600 34950 39300 43650 47150 50650 54150 57650
60% LIMITS 36720 41940 47160 52380 56580 60780 64980 69180
LOW INCOME 48900 55900 62900 69850 75450 81050 86650 92250
Chouteau County, MT
30% LIMITS 18800 21450 24150 26800 28950 31100 33250 35400 VERY LOW INCOME 31300 35800 40250 44700 48300 51900 55450 59050
60% LIMITS 37560 42960 48300 53640 57960 62280 66540 70860
LOW INCOME 50050 57200 64350 71500 77250 82950 88700 94400
Custer County, MT
30% LIMITS 19850 22700 25550 28350 30650 32900 35200 37450
VERY LOW INCOME 33100 37800 42550 47250 51050 54850 58600 62400
60% LIMITS 39720 45360 51060 56700 61260 65820 70320 74880 LOW INCOME 52950 60500 68050 75600 81650 87700 93750 99800
Daniels County, MT 30% LIMITS 19400 22150 24900 27650 29900 32100 34300 36500
VERY LOW INCOME 32300 36900 41500 46100 49800 53500 57200 60900
60% LIMITS 38760 44280 49800 55320 59760 64200 68640 73080
LOW INCOME 51650 59000 66400 73750 79650 85550 91450 97350
Effective: June 1, 2025 Page 2 of 7
47
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HUD
STATE:MONTANA --------------------- FY2025 ADJUSTED HOME INCOME LIMITS ---------------------
PROGRAM 1 PERSON 2 PERSON 3 PERSON 4 PERSON 5 PERSON 6 PERSON 7 PERSON 8 PERSON
Dawson County, MT 30% LIMITS 19250 22000 24750 27500 29700 31900 34100 36300
VERY LOW INCOME 32100 36650 41250 45800 49500 53150 56800 60500
60% LIMITS 38520 43980 49500 54960 59400 63780 68160 72600 LOW INCOME 51350 58650 66000 73300 79200 85050 90900 96800
Deer Lodge County, MT 30% LIMITS 18350 21000 23600 26200 28300 30400 32500 34600
VERY LOW INCOME 30600 34950 39300 43650 47150 50650 54150 57650
60% LIMITS 36720 41940 47160 52380 56580 60780 64980 69180
LOW INCOME 48900 55900 62900 69850 75450 81050 86650 92250
Fallon County, MT
30% LIMITS 24150 27600 31050 34500 37300 40050 42800 45550
VERY LOW INCOME 40250 46000 51750 57500 62100 66700 71300 75900 60% LIMITS 48300 55200 62100 69000 74520 80040 85560 91080
LOW INCOME 64400 73600 82800 92000 99400 106750 114100 121450
Fergus County, MT
30% LIMITS 19000 21700 24400 27100 29300 31450 33650 35800
VERY LOW INCOME 31650 36150 40650 45150 48800 52400 56000 59600
60% LIMITS 37980 43380 48780 54180 58560 62880 67200 71520
LOW INCOME 50600 57800 65050 72250 78050 83850 89600 95400
Flathead County, MT
30% LIMITS 20300 23200 26100 28950 31300 33600 35900 38250 VERY LOW INCOME 33800 38600 43450 48250 52150 56000 59850 63700
60% LIMITS 40560 46320 52140 57900 62580 67200 71820 76440
LOW INCOME 54050 61800 69500 77200 83400 89600 95750 101950
Garfield County, MT
30% LIMITS 18850 21550 24250 26900 29100 31250 33400 35550 VERY LOW INCOME 31400 35900 40400 44850 48450 52050 55650 59250
60% LIMITS 37680 43080 48480 53820 58140 62460 66780 71100
LOW INCOME 50250 57400 64600 71750 77500 83250 89000 94750
Glacier County, MT
30% LIMITS 18350 21000 23600 26200 28300 30400 32500 34600
VERY LOW INCOME 30600 34950 39300 43650 47150 50650 54150 57650
60% LIMITS 36720 41940 47160 52380 56580 60780 64980 69180 LOW INCOME 48900 55900 62900 69850 75450 81050 86650 92250
Golden Valley County, MT 30% LIMITS 18350 21000 23600 26200 28300 30400 32500 34600
VERY LOW INCOME 30600 34950 39300 43650 47150 50650 54150 57650
60% LIMITS 36720 41940 47160 52380 56580 60780 64980 69180
LOW INCOME 48900 55900 62900 69850 75450 81050 86650 92250
Effective: June 1, 2025 Page 3 of 7
48
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HUD
STATE:MONTANA --------------------- FY2025 ADJUSTED HOME INCOME LIMITS ---------------------
PROGRAM 1 PERSON 2 PERSON 3 PERSON 4 PERSON 5 PERSON 6 PERSON 7 PERSON 8 PERSON
Granite County, MT 30% LIMITS 18350 21000 23600 26200 28300 30400 32500 34600
VERY LOW INCOME 30600 34950 39300 43650 47150 50650 54150 57650
60% LIMITS 36720 41940 47160 52380 56580 60780 64980 69180 LOW INCOME 48900 55900 62900 69850 75450 81050 86650 92250
Hill County, MT 30% LIMITS 18350 21000 23600 26200 28300 30400 32500 34600
VERY LOW INCOME 30600 34950 39300 43650 47150 50650 54150 57650
60% LIMITS 36720 41940 47160 52380 56580 60780 64980 69180
LOW INCOME 48900 55900 62900 69850 75450 81050 86650 92250
Judith Basin County, MT
30% LIMITS 18750 21400 24100 26750 28900 31050 33200 35350
VERY LOW INCOME 31200 35650 40100 44550 48150 51700 55250 58850 60% LIMITS 37440 42780 48120 53460 57780 62040 66300 70620
LOW INCOME 49950 57050 64200 71300 77050 82750 88450 94150
Lake County, MT
30% LIMITS 18350 21000 23600 26200 28300 30400 32500 34600
VERY LOW INCOME 30600 34950 39300 43650 47150 50650 54150 57650
60% LIMITS 36720 41940 47160 52380 56580 60780 64980 69180
LOW INCOME 48900 55900 62900 69850 75450 81050 86650 92250
Liberty County, MT
30% LIMITS 18350 21000 23600 26200 28300 30400 32500 34600 VERY LOW INCOME 30600 34950 39300 43650 47150 50650 54150 57650
60% LIMITS 36720 41940 47160 52380 56580 60780 64980 69180
LOW INCOME 48900 55900 62900 69850 75450 81050 86650 92250
Lincoln County, MT
30% LIMITS 18350 21000 23600 26200 28300 30400 32500 34600 VERY LOW INCOME 30600 34950 39300 43650 47150 50650 54150 57650
60% LIMITS 36720 41940 47160 52380 56580 60780 64980 69180
LOW INCOME 48900 55900 62900 69850 75450 81050 86650 92250
McCone County, MT
30% LIMITS 20200 23050 25950 28800 31150 33450 35750 38050
VERY LOW INCOME 33600 38400 43200 48000 51850 55700 59550 63400
60% LIMITS 40320 46080 51840 57600 62220 66840 71460 76080 LOW INCOME 53800 61450 69150 76800 82950 89100 95250 101400
Madison County, MT 30% LIMITS 18350 21000 23600 26200 28300 30400 32500 34600
VERY LOW INCOME 30600 34950 39300 43650 47150 50650 54150 57650
60% LIMITS 36720 41940 47160 52380 56580 60780 64980 69180
LOW INCOME 48900 55900 62900 69850 75450 81050 86650 92250
Effective: June 1, 2025 Page 4 of 7
49
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HUD
STATE:MONTANA --------------------- FY2025 ADJUSTED HOME INCOME LIMITS ---------------------
PROGRAM 1 PERSON 2 PERSON 3 PERSON 4 PERSON 5 PERSON 6 PERSON 7 PERSON 8 PERSON
Meagher County, MT 30% LIMITS 18350 21000 23600 26200 28300 30400 32500 34600
VERY LOW INCOME 30600 34950 39300 43650 47150 50650 54150 57650
60% LIMITS 36720 41940 47160 52380 56580 60780 64980 69180 LOW INCOME 48900 55900 62900 69850 75450 81050 86650 92250
Musselshell County, MT 30% LIMITS 18350 21000 23600 26200 28300 30400 32500 34600
VERY LOW INCOME 30600 34950 39300 43650 47150 50650 54150 57650
60% LIMITS 36720 41940 47160 52380 56580 60780 64980 69180
LOW INCOME 48900 55900 62900 69850 75450 81050 86650 92250
Park County, MT
30% LIMITS 21150 24200 27200 30200 32650 35050 37450 39900
VERY LOW INCOME 35250 40250 45300 50300 54350 58350 62400 66400 60% LIMITS 42300 48300 54360 60360 65220 70020 74880 79680
LOW INCOME 56350 64400 72450 80500 86950 93400 99850 106300
Petroleum County, MT
30% LIMITS 19400 22150 24900 27650 29900 32100 34300 36500
VERY LOW INCOME 32300 36900 41500 46100 49800 53500 57200 60900
60% LIMITS 38760 44280 49800 55320 59760 64200 68640 73080
LOW INCOME 51650 59000 66400 73750 79650 85550 91450 97350
Phillips County, MT
30% LIMITS 18350 21000 23600 26200 28300 30400 32500 34600 VERY LOW INCOME 30600 34950 39300 43650 47150 50650 54150 57650
60% LIMITS 36720 41940 47160 52380 56580 60780 64980 69180
LOW INCOME 48900 55900 62900 69850 75450 81050 86650 92250
Pondera County, MT
30% LIMITS 18350 21000 23600 26200 28300 30400 32500 34600 VERY LOW INCOME 30600 34950 39300 43650 47150 50650 54150 57650
60% LIMITS 36720 41940 47160 52380 56580 60780 64980 69180
LOW INCOME 48900 55900 62900 69850 75450 81050 86650 92250
Powder River County, MT
30% LIMITS 19500 22250 25050 27800 30050 32250 34500 36700
VERY LOW INCOME 32450 37100 41750 46350 50100 53800 57500 61200
60% LIMITS 38940 44520 50100 55620 60120 64560 69000 73440 LOW INCOME 51950 59350 66750 74150 80100 86050 91950 97900
Powell County, MT 30% LIMITS 18350 21000 23600 26200 28300 30400 32500 34600
VERY LOW INCOME 30600 34950 39300 43650 47150 50650 54150 57650
60% LIMITS 36720 41940 47160 52380 56580 60780 64980 69180
LOW INCOME 48900 55900 62900 69850 75450 81050 86650 92250
Effective: June 1, 2025 Page 5 of 7
50
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HUD
STATE:MONTANA --------------------- FY2025 ADJUSTED HOME INCOME LIMITS ---------------------
PROGRAM 1 PERSON 2 PERSON 3 PERSON 4 PERSON 5 PERSON 6 PERSON 7 PERSON 8 PERSON
Prairie County, MT 30% LIMITS 18350 21000 23600 26200 28300 30400 32500 34600
VERY LOW INCOME 30600 35000 39350 43700 47200 50700 54200 57700
60% LIMITS 36720 42000 47220 52440 56640 60840 65040 69240 LOW INCOME 48950 55950 62950 69900 75500 81100 86700 92300
Ravalli County, MT 30% LIMITS 19600 22400 25200 27950 30200 32450 34700 36900
VERY LOW INCOME 32650 37300 41950 46600 50350 54100 57800 61550
60% LIMITS 39180 44760 50340 55920 60420 64920 69360 73860
LOW INCOME 52200 59650 67100 74550 80550 86500 92450 98450
Richland County, MT
30% LIMITS 19850 22650 25500 28300 30600 32850 35100 37400
VERY LOW INCOME 33050 37800 42500 47200 51000 54800 58550 62350 60% LIMITS 39660 45360 51000 56640 61200 65760 70260 74820
LOW INCOME 52850 60400 67950 75500 81550 87600 93650 99700
Roosevelt County, MT
30% LIMITS 18350 21000 23600 26200 28300 30400 32500 34600
VERY LOW INCOME 30600 34950 39300 43650 47150 50650 54150 57650
60% LIMITS 36720 41940 47160 52380 56580 60780 64980 69180
LOW INCOME 48900 55900 62900 69850 75450 81050 86650 92250
Rosebud County, MT
30% LIMITS 18350 21000 23600 26200 28300 30400 32500 34600 VERY LOW INCOME 30600 34950 39300 43650 47150 50650 54150 57650
60% LIMITS 36720 41940 47160 52380 56580 60780 64980 69180
LOW INCOME 48900 55900 62900 69850 75450 81050 86650 92250
Sanders County, MT
30% LIMITS 18350 21000 23600 26200 28300 30400 32500 34600 VERY LOW INCOME 30600 34950 39300 43650 47150 50650 54150 57650
60% LIMITS 36720 41940 47160 52380 56580 60780 64980 69180
LOW INCOME 48900 55900 62900 69850 75450 81050 86650 92250
Sheridan County, MT
30% LIMITS 20700 23650 26600 29550 31950 34300 36650 39050
VERY LOW INCOME 34500 39400 44350 49250 53200 57150 61100 65050
60% LIMITS 41400 47280 53220 59100 63840 68580 73320 78060 LOW INCOME 55200 63050 70950 78800 85150 91450 97750 104050
Silver Bow County, MT 30% LIMITS 18350 21000 23600 26200 28300 30400 32500 34600
VERY LOW INCOME 30600 34950 39300 43650 47150 50650 54150 57650
60% LIMITS 36720 41940 47160 52380 56580 60780 64980 69180
LOW INCOME 48900 55900 62900 69850 75450 81050 86650 92250
Effective: June 1, 2025 Page 6 of 7
51
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HUD
STATE:MONTANA --------------------- FY2025 ADJUSTED HOME INCOME LIMITS ---------------------
PROGRAM 1 PERSON 2 PERSON 3 PERSON 4 PERSON 5 PERSON 6 PERSON 7 PERSON 8 PERSON
Sweet Grass County, MT 30% LIMITS 20050 22900 25750 28600 30900 33200 35500 37800
VERY LOW INCOME 33400 38200 42950 47700 51550 55350 59150 63000
60% LIMITS 40080 45840 51540 57240 61860 66420 70980 75600 LOW INCOME 53450 61050 68700 76300 82450 88550 94650 100750
Teton County, MT 30% LIMITS 18800 21500 24200 26850 29000 31150 33300 35450
VERY LOW INCOME 31350 35800 40300 44750 48350 51950 55500 59100
60% LIMITS 37620 42960 48360 53700 58020 62340 66600 70920
LOW INCOME 50150 57300 64450 71600 77350 83100 88800 94550
Toole County, MT
30% LIMITS 18350 21000 23600 26200 28300 30400 32500 34600
VERY LOW INCOME 30600 34950 39300 43650 47150 50650 54150 57650 60% LIMITS 36720 41940 47160 52380 56580 60780 64980 69180
LOW INCOME 48900 55900 62900 69850 75450 81050 86650 92250
Treasure County, MT
30% LIMITS 18550 21200 23850 26450 28600 30700 32800 34950
VERY LOW INCOME 30900 35300 39700 44100 47650 51200 54700 58250
60% LIMITS 37080 42360 47640 52920 57180 61440 65640 69900
LOW INCOME 49400 56450 63500 70550 76200 81850 87500 93150
Valley County, MT
30% LIMITS 19950 22800 25650 28500 30800 33100 35350 37650 VERY LOW INCOME 33250 38000 42750 47500 51300 55100 58900 62700
60% LIMITS 39900 45600 51300 57000 61560 66120 70680 75240
LOW INCOME 53200 60800 68400 76000 82100 88200 94250 100350
Wheatland County, MT
30% LIMITS 18350 21000 23600 26200 28300 30400 32500 34600 VERY LOW INCOME 30600 34950 39300 43650 47150 50650 54150 57650
60% LIMITS 36720 41940 47160 52380 56580 60780 64980 69180
LOW INCOME 48900 55900 62900 69850 75450 81050 86650 92250
Wibaux County, MT
30% LIMITS 21200 24200 27250 30250 32700 35100 37550 39950
VERY LOW INCOME 35300 40350 45400 50450 54500 58500 62550 66550
60% LIMITS 42360 48420 54480 60540 65400 70200 75060 79860 LOW INCOME 56500 64600 72650 80700 87200 93650 100100 106550
Effective: June 1, 2025 Page 7 of 7
52
Memorandum
REPORT TO:Study Commission
FROM:Caeleb Heinen, Recording Secretary
Mike Maas, Ex Officio
SUBJECT:Upcoming Agendas Discussion
MEETING DATE:January 28, 2026
AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Citizen Advisory Board/Commission
RECOMMENDATION:Planning for the upcoming February/March agendas.
STRATEGIC PLAN:1.1 Outreach: Continue to strengthen and innovate in how we deliver
information to the community and our partners.
BACKGROUND:Executive leader of the City
City manager structure (Article III)
Executive mayor
Hybrid
Topics:
Benefits & challenges of each form
What do other MT cities do?
What are cities outside of MT doing?
What are best practices
Feb-March focus:
Feb 5: Learning session on benefits & challenges; what other MT cities
are doing.
Feb 18: Learning session best practices from other cities and beginning
of discussion.
March 5: make preliminary decisions about potential changes to
executive leadership of the city
Use chart that we’ll have to develop for tentative report to discuss existing
characteristics and proposed change
Speakers:
MSU Local Gov’t Center
Required materials for reading:
Montana Charters reviewed by study commission
53
Model charter from National Civic league
Charter commentary in previous study commission report
Decisions to be made:
Recommendations
Charter modifications
Sub-option changes: binary choices to be voted on
UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None identified
ALTERNATIVES:As per City Study Commission
FISCAL EFFECTS:None
Report compiled on: January 22, 2026
54
Memorandum
REPORT TO:Study Commission
SUBJECT:Options for an Alternative to July 2
MEETING DATE:January 28, 2026
AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Citizen Advisory Board/Commission
RECOMMENDATION:In response to concerns of scheduling a meeting the day before the
observed July 4 holiday, possible alternative dates are:
June 18: Currently scheduled for a short meeting on June 17; could move to
June 18 without the hard out at 6 p.m. or back-to-back nights
June 29 or 30: Fifth Monday and Tuesday of the month have no meetings
scheduled
Additionally, potentially adjusting the Study Plan to modify the proposed
July 2 Final Report Adoption to the Following week; Gallatin County Elections
Deadline needs an adopted resolution no later than August 10.
55
ORDINANCE NO. 2152
Page 1 of 4
ORDINANCE NO. 2152
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN,
MONTANA, AMENDING THE SALARIES AND EXPENSES OF THE CITY
COMMISSIONERS AND MAYOR OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN.
WHEREAS, Sec. 2.04 of the City of Bozeman Charter authorizes, the City Commission
to determine the annual salary of the Commission and Mayor by ordinance; and
WHEREAS, said section of the Charter also requires that no ordinance increasing such
salary shall become effective until the date of commencement of the terms of commission
members elected at the next regular election; and
WHEREAS, said section of the Charter authorizes the mayor and commission members
to receive, in addition to a salary, their actual ordinary and necessary expenses incurred in the
performance of their duties of office.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA:
Section 1
Commencing upon the first regular meeting of the City Commission in January 2024, the
monthly salary of a City Commissioner shall be $2,251.00. Pursuant to 2.02.150, BMC, for each
month of service, the monthly salary of the Mayor shall be $3,376.50, equal to one and one-half
(1.5) times that of the Commissioners. In addition, commencing with the first Commission
meeting in January of 2025, the above salaries shall be adjusted annually based on the U.S.
Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers for All Items as published in the preceding
December.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 19961B5A-92C5-42E4-99E8-30E52ED30805
856
ORDINANCE NO. 2152
Page 2 of 4
Section 2
In the event of an unexcused absence from a Commission meeting by a Commissioner, the
sum of $562.75 shall be deducted from the monthly pay and for an unexcused absence by the
Mayor, the sum of $844.13 shall be deducted from the monthly pay. The amount of deduction
shall likewise be adjusted as the annual salary is adjusted with the deduction for each unexcused
absence equal to a rate of 25% of the monthly salary.
Section 3
In addition to the salaries, the City Commissioners, other than the Mayor, shall receive a
monthly allowance of $200.00 for incidental expenses. The Mayor shall receive a monthly
allowance of $300.00 for incidental expenses. The Mayor and City Commissioners may be
reimbursed for actual cost of other reimbursable expenses, such as registrations for conferences
and seminars, dinner meetings, and other in-state or out-of-town travel and expenses.
Section 4
During their term in office, City Commissioners may opt to participate in the employee
benefits program provided to individual City employees and may choose the type of coverage plan
they wish to participate in of those offered by the Montana Municipal Interlocal Authority
(MMIA). As such, the City Commissioners may opt to receive the standard City contribution to
health insurance coverage applicable to City employees at the amount set for all City employees
and elected officials. In addition, City Commissioners may opt to participate in, at their own cost,
health club memberships and ancillary benefits pursuant to policies established by the City
Manager.
Section 5
Effective Date.
The salaries listed in Section 1 and the provisions of Section 2 and Section 3 shall be
effective at the commencement of the terms of the City Commissioners and Mayor elected in the
2023 general City election which date shall be the first regular meeting of the Commission in
January 2024. Section 4 is effective immediately.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 19961B5A-92C5-42E4-99E8-30E52ED30805
957
ORDINANCE NO. 2152
Page 3 of 4
Section 6
Repealer.
All resolutions, ordinances and sections of the Bozeman Municipal Code and parts thereof
in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.
Section 7
Severability.
If any provisions of this ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstances
is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions of this Ordinance which may
be given effect without the invalid provision or application and, to this end, the provisions of this
ordinance are declared to be severable.
Section 8
This Ordinance shall not be codified but shall be kept by the City Clerk and entered into a
disposition list in numerical order with all other ordinances as determined by the City Clerk.
PROVISIONALLY PASSED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana,
on first reading at a regular session held on the ____ day of September, 2023.
____________________________________
CYNTHIA L. ANDRUS
Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________________
MIKE MAAS
City Clerk
DocuSign Envelope ID: 19961B5A-92C5-42E4-99E8-30E52ED30805
12th
XXXXXXXXXXXX Alex Newby
XXXXXXXXXXX Deputy City Clerk
1058
ORDINANCE NO. 2152
Page 4 of 4
FINALLY PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED by the City Commission of the
City of Bozeman, Montana on second reading at a regular session thereof held on the ___ of
____________________, 2023.
_________________________________
CYNTHIA L. ANDRUS
Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
MIKE MAAS
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________________
GREG SULLIVAN
City Attorney
DocuSign Envelope ID: 19961B5A-92C5-42E4-99E8-30E52ED30805
Alex Newby
26th
Deputy City Clerk
XXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXX
September
1159