HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-19-26 Public Comment - L. Semones - Board EfficacyFrom:Linda Semones
To:Bozeman Public Comment
Cc:Joey Morrison; Douglas Fischer; Jennifer Madgic; Emma Bode; Alison Sweeney; Chuck Winn
Subject:[EXTERNAL]Board Efficacy
Date:Thursday, March 19, 2026 1:52:06 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you
recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
March 19, 2026
Dear Mayor Morrison, Deputy Mayor Fischer,
Commissioner Madgic, Commissioner Bode and
Commissioner Sweeney,
I am writing to you as a former vice-chair of the Historic
Preservation Board. I understand that you are to review the
functions of the various citizen boards of the City of
Bozeman. I have spoken with City Manager Chuck Winn
about several of the points below and he expressed
interest and even enthusiasm for working on improving city
board efficacy. I thank him very much for his ear and for
his time. Since then, with further thought, I have added
several points. I also would like to direct my comments to
your Commission.
The purpose of a city board should be to inform the City
Commission and Staff of the needs of residents and to
help residents work with the city to achieve mutual goals.
A city board should convey city concerns to the citizens, as
well as to transmit resident concerns to the city
commission through public comment and engagement. To
achieve these priorities, I suggest the following:
<!--[if !supportLists]-->1. <!--[endif]--> City Boards should be able to
elect their own officers.
The City Commission liaison, a staff liaison and the
Board Chair review the public
applications for board seats. Currently, the
commission liaison and staff liaison
select the Board Chair and Vice-Chair. Why should
the board not elect its own
officers? This would help counteract the
appearance of city control of board
functions, as well as give the board some
autonomy.
<!--[if !supportLists]-->2. <!--[endif]-->The minutes of the city boards
should be written, not just linked to a video.
If I, as a citizen, wish to review board actions,
currently I must use a video link to find the actions I
need to educate myself. Video links are only as good
as the technology supporting them. They can be
inaccessible due to technology failures.
They are not easy to search as there is no query
function. The city minutes should be written out as in
the past and stored online with a query function. This
would allow citizens to access past actions and
search for specific agenda items and decisions in a
timely and appropriate way. The discussion before
votes and the votes themselves should be recorded in
writing and indexed. Video links are very useful, but a
written record should not be eliminated. With the re-
establishment of a board secretary position, a concise
written record could be archived and indexed.
<!--[if !supportLists]-->3. <!--[endif]-->City Board two-year work
plans should not just be approved. They should be
returned to each board with comments from the
commission liaison, commissioners and staff
attached to provide interaction and to assure that they
have been read. Any process required to initiate a
board project should be made clear at the time of
work plan approval. During my time on a city board,
we initiated action on a project that was included in
our two-year plan. We assumed that the plan had
been read and approved by the commissioners. We
received notification from a city commissioner that
this initiation of a project was inappropriate, that the
commissioners felt “blindsided.” Evidently the city
commissioners needed to approve the project first,
through a presentation to the city. The initiation
process should have been made clear when the two-
year work plan was approved by the city
commissioners to avoid this embarrassing situation.
Also, the city commission should not feel “blindsided”
by an action item on an approved work plan.
<!--[if !supportLists]-->4. <!--[endif]-->City Boards should be
enabled to complete their projects in a timely manner.
I spent 4 years on a city board after the high achieving
boards were instituted. During that time, we did not
complete the following:
The Fred Willson multi-property historic district, the
Heritage Tree Project (joint with the Urban Forestry
Board), a repurpose and reuse seminar with speakers
from the State of Montana Historical Preservation
Board. It is true that during this time, staff was
consumed by the revision of the UDC. We were told
often and strongly that staff were too busy to take on a
further load. However, board members should have
been given some autonomy to design and carry out
work without totally being dependent on staff. This is
in no way intended to undervalue the hard work that
staff performs. It is, rather, to allow high achieving
boards to manage their goals with the trust and
guidance of staff.
<!--[if !supportLists]-->5. <!--[endif]-->City Boards should be able to
express dissent and have that dissent noted and
valued.
I was specifically told by a previous City Manager, that
once a city board votes on an issue, there should be
no further discussion by that board, either in public
discourse or from the board podium. All dissent
should be put aside, and the board should act as one.
This philosophy of the “one board, one voice”
silences opposing opinions. Our own Supreme Court
allows the dissenting judges their own expression in a
written dissenting opinion. If I, as a board member,
have a dissenting opinion, I should be able to express
that opinion even after a vote, in civil discourse. The
minority opinion is often an aid to policy correction
and should not be silenced.
<!--[if !supportLists]-->6. <!--[endif]-->City Boards should be able to
have joint communications and interactions on topics
of mutual concern. All barriers to working together
with other boards should come down. For example,
the Historic Preservation Board and the Urban
Forestry Board should be able to jointly support the
Heritage Tree project. I am hopeful that this will
happen soon.
<!--[if !supportLists]-->7. <!--[endif]-->City Resolutionn 5323 (2018)
should be reviewed and revised. This resolution
eliminated many city boards and restricted board
dissent after taking a board vote. It is time to re-
evaluate the ordinance. The goal of high performing
boards is a good one. It is time to create an ordinance
that gives boards the autonomy to perform highly.
I submit my experiences and concerns as a dedicated
resident, ex-board member, and as someone who values
working with the highly professional staff of the City of
Bozeman. My only intention is to make suggestions to
improve board achievements.
Sincerely,
Linda Semones. 404 S Church Ave. Bozeman