HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-25-26 Public Comment - P. Danahy - Recommendations for Proposed Charter TextFrom:Patrick Danahy
To:Bozeman Goverment Study Commission
Subject:[EXTERNAL][Possible Scam Fraud]Recommendations for Proposed Charter Text
Date:Thursday, June 25, 2026 10:19:57 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 apotential threat.
The sender may propose a business relationship and submit a request for quotation orproposal. 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 notrespond or click on links in the message. Depending on the security settings, clickable URLs
may have been modified to provide additional security.
Dear Members of the Bozeman Study Commission, I am a Bozeman writing to submit
public comment on three important issues currently 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 you have 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 for
creating potential ward boundaries. Each of these provisions is essential to ensuringaccountable, fair, and democratic governance for all residents of Bozeman.
I. Compensation Board The question of how elected officials are compensated
must be answered independently, free from the influence of the very officials whose
pay is being set. I urge the Commission to adopt the following language in the charterin Section 2.04: “A Compensation Board shall be created that will convene annually to
assess and determine compensation 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 qualified electors whose principal residence is in the Cityof Bozeman shall be eligible to serve on the Board. No elected city official, city
employee, or anyone with a direct financial interest in city contracts 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 before anycompensation 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 with financial conflicts
eliminates the most obvious avenues for self-dealing. Four-year terms providecontinuity without allowing any single commission to entrench its preferences on the
board. Crucially, open meetings and a public comment period ensure that Bozeman
residents have a voice in the process before any determination is made.
II. Mayoral Succession The charter should provide an unambiguous, step-by-stepprocess for filling a vacancy in the office of mayor. Residents have made it clear that
they do not like the appointment process for filling 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. I urge 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 ofmayor for the remainder of the term. If the vice mayor is unable or unwilling to serve,
the city commission 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 an appointment from outside the elected body.” This approachprioritizes democratic legitimacy at every step. The vice mayor, having been chosen
by Bozeman voters, is the natural and appropriate first successor. Turning next to the
remaining elected commissioners keeps the office in the hands of those the public
has already entrusted with governance. An outside appointment becomes an optiononly 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 of significant 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, and the policy debates currently before the commission. Stepping into themayor's role from that foundation is a very different proposition than placing someone
entirely new in the position with 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 competence and continuity of governancefor 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 officials themselves, the risk ofmanipulation, intentional or not, is real and well-documented. I urge the Commission
to establish an independent Citizens' Redistricting Advisory Board with the following
charter language in Section 7.02: “(a) Citizens’ Redistricting Advisory Board. The city
commission shall establish an independent Citizens’ Redistricting Advisory Boardconsisting of five (5) members who are qualified 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 members shall be appointed by the City
Commission following a public application process, ensuring geographic diversityacross the city. (b) Standards and Criteria. The Board shall divide the city into [four
(4) or six (6)] wards by submitting a final report to the City Commission for adoption
by ordinance. Each ward shall be compact and contiguous, and the population
disparity between wards shall not exceed ten percent (10%) at the time of anyboundary determination. Boundaries of each ward shall be compact, contiguous, and
as nearly equal in population as practicable, and shall preserve existing
Neighborhood Association boundaries to the maximum extent feasible. No ward shall
be drawn for the purpose of favoring or discriminating against any political party or
incumbent officeholder; 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 their principal 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 before finalizing any ward map. The Board shallcomplete and file its initial recommended ward boundaries with the City Commission
for adoption by ordinance within ninety (90) days of the Board’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 is foundto 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, draw the ward lines, removing the self-interest that has corruptedredistricting processes in cities and states across the country. The requirement for
geographic diversity in board membership ensures 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 equal representation and is standardpractice. Preserving Neighborhood Association boundaries keeps established
communities intact and offers consistent representation throughout the neighborhood.
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 reflectsthe democratic values its residents expect and deserve. Compensation decisions
made by independent citizens, leadership transitions that make sense, and ward
boundaries drawn fairly, in public, by people with no political stake in the outcome. I
respectfully urge the Commission to adopt this language in the final charter. Thankyou for your service to our community and for the opportunity to comment. Sincerely,
Patrik Danahy