Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-15-26 Public Comment - N. Nakamura - Re_ Comments on Section 2.04 Compensation and 2.06 VacanciesFrom:Natsuki Nakamura To:Bozeman Goverment Study Commission Subject:[EXTERNAL]Re: Comments on Section 2.04 Compensation and 2.06 Vacancies Date:Monday, June 15, 2026 9:35:26 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. Dear Study Commission, Looking at the 6/18 Charter draft, the confusing language on how a vacancy of the Mayor is filled has not been cleared up. Please see my 5/27 email below on my concerns with thelanguage of 2.06 Vacancies. Additionally, I have some thoughts/concerns regarding compensation (section 2.04 Compensation): AMI (Area Median Income) is calculated annually by HUD (US Dept of Housing and UrbanDevelopment) for Bozeman/Gallatin County, and has a formula for calculating for different size households. AMI can and has varied drastically in recent history. For some historic reference, the 100% AMI for Gallatin Valley for the last several years: 2026: $130,200 for a family of 4 (about $91,200 for 1 person) 2025: $120,700 for a family of 4 (about $83,300 for 1 person)2024: $109,00 for a family of 4 (about $76,300 for 1 person) 2023: $126,400 for a family of 4 (about $73,600 for 1 person)2022: $104,700 for a family of 4 (about $69,600 for 1 person) 2021: $88,900 for a family of 4 (about $62,300 for 1 person) (Also for reference, the starting salary for an entry Bozeman teacher in 2026 is around $50,000/year; the starting salary for an entry Bozeman firefighter in 2026 is around$70,000/year) Is the intention of "full-time equivalent" language to pay a Commissioner and theMayor around the 100% AMI metric? I do not think it makes sense to base the salary of an individual member serving on the Commission on the 100% AMI for a household of4. When considering affordable housing, different ranges of % of AMI and different size households are considered. Is the intention that Commissioner and Mayor salaries will go up (and down) automatically with AMI?Is the intention that Commissioners and the Mayor are paid the same amount, with the only difference being if the Mayor is putting in significantly more hours? I believecurrently the Mayor is paid double the amount as Commissioners (even though both may very well be putting in 40+ hours each week). Is the intention to pay the Mayor and/or Commissioners more than 100% AMI if they report putting in more than 40 hrs/wk (as some who have served or are serving havereported)? I don't think the charter should determine the answer to these questions, but instead focus on aclear process on how compensation is assessed and changed, one that puts some distance from the City Commission determining their own salaries. Perhaps language could besomething like, "The Compensation Board shall convene annually to assess and determine compensation for Commissioners and the Mayor for the subsequent fiscal year, taking intoconsideration the most recent AMI (Area Median Income) of Bozeman," avoiding language such as "appropriate percentage," "full-time equivalent," and "expected to work." Clear butnon-presctiptive language would give the board the ability to change or maintain the compensation, consider what % of AMI is fair, and any pay differential between the Mayorand Commissioners. Thank you for your consideration, Natsuki Nakamurawriting as only an individual Bozeman resident On Wed, May 27, 2026 at 11:13 PM Natsuki Nakamura <nenakamura4@gmail.com> wrote:Dear Study Commission: Thank you as always for your dedication and long hours. One section in the draft charter might need to be cleaned up (if this was already addressedpreviously and I missed it, thank you and disregard the following message). Section 2.06(a) states: (my emphasis added) "If the mayor is incapacitated, dies, resigns from office, or is removed from office, the vicemayor shall succeed as mayor during said time for the balance of the mayor’s term, as appropriate; and the commission vacancy created therein shall be filled pursuant to thissection." while Section 2.06(c) states: (my emphasis added) "Filling of Vacancies. A vacancy in the city commission or the office of the mayor shall befilled within 60 days of the occurrence of the vacancy by vote of the existing city commissioners. Commissioners must hold a public forum with applicants for the vacantcommission or mayor position. This appointment will be in place until the next municipalelection. The vacancy shall otherwise be filled, pursuant to state law." Per 2.06(a), a vacancy in the mayor position should be filled by the previously decided vice mayor, and thus there shouldn't ever be the need to fill the mayorposition with an appointment from a pool of applicants; only the newly vacant commissioner seat (when the vice mayor becomes mayor) would need to be filled.This is probably good to ensure that the mayor is always someone who was at least elected, not appointed, to be on the commission. Therefore, I think the language in2.06(c) referencing the mayor position should be removed. It is unclear to me between 2.06(a) and (c) how long a vice mayor becoming mayorwould serve. As an extreme example, say a mayor was elected in 2029 for a term 2030-2034, with a vice mayor selected from the commission (as per 2.03(c)) to serve2030-2032, but then the newly elected mayor tragically passed away partway through 2030. Would the vice mayor become mayor until 2032 with an election held in 2031for a new mayor with a term of 2032-2034, or would the vice mayor serve as mayor until 2034 (with an election for a new mayor in 2033 for a 4-year term)? The languagein Section 2.06(a) suggests the latter (especially if the language referencing the mayor is removed from Section 2.06(c)), but that could potentially be a long time that the vice mayor serves as mayor and potentially longer than their intended appointment asvice mayor. Additionally, perhaps some language needs to be added to 2.06(a) or elsewhere tostate that, if the vice mayor has to step in as the mayor or resigns from the commission, then a new vice mayor from the remaining commission members needsto be appointed (so that it is clear who presides over meetings in the absence of the mayor). Thank you for your consideration, Natsuki NakamuraDisclosure: I'm a member of the Economic Vitality Board, but speaking only on behalf of myself.