Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-22-26 Public Comment - C. Anders - Comments for Bozeman CharterFrom:Chase Anders To:Bozeman Goverment Study Commission Subject:[EXTERNAL]Comments for Bozeman Charter Date:Wednesday, April 22, 2026 7:34:28 AM 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. Good MOrning, im writing in as a resident at 1543 Ryun SUn way in Bozeman, MT. Please see my comments below to ensure a voice for Residents of Bozeman. 1. Codifying organic neighborhood creation and autonomy: We have stripped the City Commission of the power to create, dictate boundaries for, or dissolve Neighborhood Associations. Residents will define their own neighborhood boundaries and determine their own leadership. In contrast, the Study Commission is trying to wipe out the 15 neighborhoods that are currently formally recognized by the city and give power to the City Commission to develop new boundaries that will include all Bozeman residents in a Neighborhood Association. This will allow the City Commission to install through appointment their preferred neighborhood leaders, just as they do with the current advisory board system. This is not a solution, and there has been no public engagement that supports this idea. The only way to avoid the multitude of both intended and unintended consequences the Study Commission’s proposed language will create is to establish ward-based representation. 2. Creation of a “Neighborhood Impact Statement” Process: One of the biggest complaints from Bozeman residents and the Inter-Neighborhood Council is that they volunteer their time to give genuine input to the City Commission, and the City Commission will not even consider their ideas. (See the YouTube video shared above for a recent example.) We have created a new process called the Neighborhood Impact Statement (NIS), which is a formal method for recognized Neighborhood Associations and the Inter-Neighborhood Council to publicly express support or opposition to any pending city policy. Unlike the Study Commission’s vague “dialogue,” the NIS requires a formal response from the City Commission if they choose to vote against a neighborhood’s recommendation. Our language also grants recognized Neighborhood Associations and the Inter-Neighborhood Council a dedicated 10-minute presentation at public hearings to present their findings in the Neighborhood Impact Statement. This ensures that the neighborhood’s collective expertise is heard as an equal finding to city staff and project applicants, rather than being buried in the general shuffle of the public comment period. 3. Financial Independence Standards: The City’s current view of conflicts of interests is weak, so much so that employees of organizations and companies the City contracts with and gives grant money to sit on and steer what are supposed to be citizen advisory boards. We have established clear eligibility requirements for serving on an advisory board, where if an individual or their employer is under contract with the City or receives grant money from the City, they are disqualified from serving on the advisory boards. 4. More Autonomy for Advisory Boards: We have provided an explicit right for advisory boards to add items to their own agendas and initiate their own work plans. This overturns the current model, whereby the City Commission, via City staff, sets the priorities and uses the advisory boards that are stacked with the people they hand-pick to agree with them and to support their decisions. Best Regards, Chase Anders