HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-25-26 Public Comment - M. Paffhausen - Bozeman Study Commission Public CommentFrom:Marc Paffhausen
To:Bozeman Goverment Study Commission
Cc:Traci DelVecchio
Subject:[EXTERNAL][Possible Scam Fraud]Bozeman Study Commission Public Comment
Date:Thursday, June 25, 2026 3:29:44 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.
WARNING: Your email security system has determined the message below may be a
potential threat.
The sender may propose a business relationship and submit a request for quotation or
proposal. Do not disclose any sensitive information in response.
If you do not know the sender or cannot verify the integrity of the message, please do not
respond or click on links in the message. Depending on the security settings, clickable URLsmay have been modified to provide additional security.
Dear Members of the Bozeman Study Commission,
I am writing as a Bozeman resident to submit public comment on three important issuescurrently under consideration as part of the city charter review, and without these changes, I
believe voters will be reluctant to vote “yes” this November on the new charter language youhave proposed. I urge you to adopt the specific language below on these three key areas: the
Compensation Board, how vacancies are filled in the role of mayor, and who is responsible forcreating potential ward boundaries. Each of these provisions is essential to ensuring
accountable, fair, and democratic governance for all residents of Bozeman.
I. Compensation Board
The question of how elected officials are compensated must be answered independently, freefrom the influence of the very officials whose pay is being set. I urge the Commission to adopt
the following language in the charter in Section 2.04:
“A Compensation Board shall be created that will convene annually to assess and determinecompensation for the mayor and commissioners. The Board shall consist of five (5) members
appointed by the City Commission, each serving a term of four (4) years. Only qualifiedelectors whose principal residence is in the City of Bozeman shall be eligible to serve on the
Board. No elected city official, city employee, or anyone with a direct financial interest in citycontracts or city finances may be a member of the Compensation Board. All meetings of the
Board shall be open to the public, and the Board shall provide a public comment period beforeany compensation determination is finalized.”
This language establishes the structural independence necessary for a compensation process
that residents can trust. The exclusion of elected officials, city employees, and those withfinancial conflicts eliminates the most obvious avenues for self-dealing. Four-year terms
provide continuity without allowing any single commission to entrench its preferences on the
board. Crucially, open meetings and a public comment period ensure that Bozeman residentshave a voice in the process before any determination is made.
II. Mayoral Succession
The charter should provide an unambiguous, step-by-step process for filling a vacancy in the
office of mayor. Residents have made it clear that they do not like the appointment process forfilling vacancies, and immediately appointing someone outside of the already elected body to
fill the seat of mayor in the case of a vacancy compounds the public’s distrust of this process. Iurge the Commission to adopt the following succession language in Section 2.06(c):
“In the event of a vacancy in the office of mayor, the vice mayor shall assume the duties of
mayor for the remainder of the term. If the vice mayor is unable or unwilling to serve, the citycommission shall appoint one of the remaining elected commissioners to fill the role. Only if
no elected commissioner is willing or able to serve shall the commission consider anappointment from outside the elected body.”
This approach prioritizes democratic legitimacy at every step. The vice mayor, having been
chosen by Bozeman voters, is the natural and appropriate first successor. Turning next to theremaining elected commissioners keeps the office in the hands of those the public has already
entrusted with governance. An outside appointment becomes an option only as a last resort,which is a sensible safeguard that should nonetheless remain available. This clear order of
succession removes ambiguity from a process that, without it, could become a source ofsignificant civic disruption.
There is a practical case for this approach as well. Because of the duties you have retained in
the charter, the office of mayor is one of the most consequential positions in city government,and filling a vacancy is not the time for on-the-job learning. A sitting commissioner, by
definition, already understands the city's budget process, its ongoing initiatives, its staff, andthe policy debates currently before the commission. Stepping into the mayor's role from that
foundation is a very different proposition than placing someone entirely new in the positionwith no prior exposure to how city government actually functions. Keeping succession within
the elected body is not just a matter of democratic principle; it is a matter of basic competenceand continuity of governance for the residents of Bozeman.
III. Independent Citizens' Redistricting Advisory Board
Ward boundaries determine who represents Bozeman residents and how effectively every
neighborhood's voice is heard. When those boundaries are drawn by elected officialsthemselves, the risk of manipulation, intentional or not, is real and well-documented. I urge
the Commission to establish an independent Citizens' Redistricting Advisory Board with thefollowing charter language in Section 7.02:
“(a) Citizens’ Redistricting Advisory Board. The city commission shall establish an
independent Citizens’ Redistricting Advisory Board consisting of five (5) members who arequalified electors domiciled within the city limits of Bozeman. No elected official, city
employee, or declared candidate for public office shall serve on the Board. Board membersshall be appointed by the City Commission following a public application process, ensuring
geographic diversity across the city.
(b) Standards and Criteria. The Board shall divide the city into [four (4) or six (6)] wards bysubmitting a final report to the City Commission for adoption by ordinance. Each ward shall
be compact, contiguous, and the population disparity between wards shall not exceed tenpercent (10%) at the time of any boundary determination. Boundaries of each ward shall be
compact, contiguous, as nearly equal in population as practicable, and shall preserve existingNeighborhood Association boundaries to the maximum extent feasible. No ward shall be
drawn for the purpose of favoring or discriminating against any political party of incumbentofficeholder; provided, however, that no boundary alteration shall exclude an incumbent
commissioner from their ward prior to the expiration of that incumbent’s current term.Changes to the boundaries of a ward may not be made between the city commission candidate
filing date and the date of the subsequent election. Commissioners forfeit their office if theirprincipal residence is no longer within the ward the commissioner represents.
(c) Timeline and Public Process. The Board shall conduct its work in public meetings in an
open, transparent manner and shall hold a minimum of two (2) public hearings beforefinalizing any ward map. The Board shall complete and file its initial recommended ward
boundaries with the City Commission for adoption by ordinance within ninety (90) days of theBoard’s creation. Ward boundaries shall be reviewed within twelve (12) months following the
publication of each decennial federal census thereafter or sooner if the population disparity isfound to exceed ten percent (10%). Upon adoption of the boundaries by ordinance, the ward
boundaries shall become legally effective for the next scheduled municipal election.”
This language achieves several important goals simultaneously. Citizens, not politicians, drawthe ward lines, removing the self-interest that has corrupted redistricting processes in cities
and states across the country. The requirement for geographic diversity in board membershipensures all parts of Bozeman have a stake in the outcome. The 10% population disparity cap
and the requirement for compact, contiguous wards protect the principle of equalrepresentation and is standard practice. Preserving Neighborhood Association boundaries
keeps established communities intact and offers consistent representation throughout theneighborhood. And the requirement for at least two public hearings before any map is
finalized ensures residents have a genuine opportunity to weigh in. The number of wards, fouror six, is appropriately left to voters to decide in November; what matters is that whichever
number is chosen, the process for drawing them is independent, transparent, and fair.
Taken together, these three provisions would give Bozeman a charter that reflects thedemocratic values its residents expect and deserve. Compensation decisions made by
independent citizens, leadership transitions that make sense, and ward boundaries drawnfairly, in public, by people with no political stake in the outcome.
I respectfully urge the Commission to adopt this language in the final charter. Thank you for
your service to our community and for the opportunity to comment.
Sincerely,Marc Paffhausen