Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-25-26 Public Comment - L. Paul - CC Study Report CommentsFrom:lynn paul To:Bozeman Goverment Study Commission Subject:[EXTERNAL]CC Study Report Comments Date:Thursday, June 25, 2026 9:09:11 PM Attachments:CC Study Report Comments June 24 2026 8pm.docx 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. Thank you for your invitation to offer comments regarding the Tentative Report. -- Lynn C. Paul, EdD, RD 1 TO: Bozeman City Commission Study Group FROM: Lynn Paul DATE: June 26, 2026 I’d like to thank the Study Group for their commitment to the thoughtful revisions within the City Charter resulting in this Tentative Report. The Study Group prioritized public engagement in their initial work plan and was then highly successful in promoting and receiving public input. Their work serves as an excellent example of how public engagement as defined in the City Charter can yield significant outcomes. There are three areas within the public engagement section that I think are the most difficult to accomplish but the most important if public engagement will be successful and trusted. The first section is the assumption that Public Engagement shall ensure two -way communication between city and community. In the case of the past several years regarding residents’ input on Bozeman’s growth, two -way communication was certainly not the circumstance. Public engagement had only been one-way communication with Bozeman citizens providing frequent and clear public input yet being provided little information back from Commissioners. Bozeman citizens should be applauded for their interest and dedication in providing input to Commissioners. However, two City Commission documents, one being the Strategic Plan and Priorities for 2024-2025, listed public engagement as the 2 top priority. In following through with the public engagement responsibilities stated in these plans, communication from the Commissioners should have included results of input and explained how public input affected decisions. However, the input for the most part was not significantly taken into consideration in decision making on topics greatly impacting Bozeman. If Commissioners are seemingly not listening to Bozeman citizens, to whom are they listening? How were they making decisions? Given the history of City Commissioners’ lack of communication with residents regarding their input, it may be difficult to engage future input unless there is work completed by the Commissioners that will assure residents that their input is being responsibly acknowledged and recognized. This leads to the second difficult section, Transparency. a. The city shall communicate clearly to ensure community members can engage effectively. The city does a good job in this area. b. The city shall share results and explain how public input affects decisions. This area is critical and needs to be well defined if the public is willing to trust the process of public engagement. However, in the recent past, sharing information and explaining how their input influenced decision making was rarely, if ever, provided. In the future, it is imperative that the City Commission understand and follow through by communicating this critical information. As the community members are 50% of the public engagement process, it is very important that the City Commission be fully engaged in 3 sharing results and explaining how public input effects decisions. The Third important but difficult section is Accountability. The city shall provide opportunities for public input regarding decisions. The city shall be clear about the purpose, scope, and how input will be used and how that input figures into their decisions while allowing flexibility as conditions change. Like Transparency, Accountability needs to be well defined if the public is willing to trust the process of public engagement. Whether or not the City Charter is approved by voters, it is imperative that the first step in future public engagement projects would be City Commissioners’ acceptance and understanding that the have taken responsibility for their roles and developed strategies for communication. Just as city employees have had training from the Association for Public Participation2 (IAP2), it is imperative that City Commissioners also receive train ing in their specific roles and responsibilities for public engagement. Thank you for your invitation to offer comments regarding the Tentative Report. Lynn Paul, EdD, RD _______________________________________________________________ I provided a portion of this input at the June 18, 2026 City Commission meeting and was requested by Becky Franks to provide more information on the three areas discussed above. 4 A web search on Commissioners’ responsibilities and roles in relaying information to the public yielded: Commissioners can relay public engagement information by summarizing and documenting feedback, sharing actionable findings directly with relevant municipal departments or staff, and “closing the feedback loop” by reporting back to the community via project websites, social media platforms, or official board and commission meetings. A systematic approach ensures that community input is transparently integrated into government decision-making: • Document and Summarize: Consolidate written comments, survey data, and meeting minutes into concise, readable summaries so stakeholders can clearly see the general consensus. • Liaise with Staff and Elected Officials: Act as a bridge between the community and city staff . Provide specific, actionable reports to the legislative body or executive teams to influence policies and budgets. • Close the Feedback Loop: Report back to the public on how their feedback was used and how it shaped the final policy or project. • Leverage Multiple Channels: Distribute updates and engagement summaries through the official local government websites, email newsletters, or public hearings to reach broader audiences.