HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-26-26 Public Comment - B. Thome - Recommendations for Proposed Charter Text and CommentaryFrom:Brad Thome
To:Bozeman Goverment Study Commission
Subject:[EXTERNAL][Possible Scam Fraud]Recommendations for Proposed Charter Test and Commentary
Date:Friday, June 26, 2026 2:05:31 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's,
I want to let you know how I feel about the current City Government. And then provide input
to your charter review.
CURRENT STATE OF CITY GOVERNMENT (last 8 years starting with Andrus)
Starting with Cindy Andrus's reign as Mayor, this City government has beenideologically driven with only fake interest in the input from citizens. Bozeman has been
destroyed by high density mixed community housing. What once was a jewel of the Rockieshas been raped and plundered by out of state developers.
We have people on the Zoning Board with direct conflicts of interest. We have appointed City
Commissioners that are radical Democrat activists. I have gone to so many City Commissionmeetings and been ignored. And I have seen hundreds of other people be ignored. When
Cindy was Mayor, she would turn to Jeff Mihelich (who was an arrogant jerk who thought heknew everything and totally railroaded a radical progressive agenda down this cities' collective
throats) and he would say one sentence refuting the citizen commentary and the council wouldmove on.
There was and still is never any data sources cited and no credible benchmarking done against
other cities our size to understand what actually works. We just get our property taxes raised(mine have more than doubled in 8 years) and we get ZERO additional services. In Meadow
Creek, the subdivision I live in, we have no police presence and we are far from a fire station. The snow plowing is third world level. Why do I pay taxes ?
I could keep going, but I will say this and then get on with my commentary about your
government initiative. This is the most incompetent and tyrannical city government that Ihave ever had in my life in the 5 cities I have lived in. The biggest crime you could commit is
to wind up with Commissioners getting a huge pay increase and continue to lack
accountability with the citizens. Return power to the people, including recall capability.
CITY CHARTER REVIEW INPUT
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 theboard. 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-step process for filling a vacancy in theoffice 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 tofill 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 ifno elected commissioner is willing or able to serve shall the commission consider an
appointment from outside the elected body.”
This approach prioritizes democratic legitimacy at every step. The vice mayor, having beenchosen 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 alreadyentrusted 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 ofsuccession 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 inthe 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, bydefinition, already understands the city's budget process, its ongoing initiatives, its staff, and
the policy debates currently before the commission. Stepping into the mayor's role from thatfoundation 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 withinthe elected body is not just a matter of democratic principle; it is a matter of basic competence
and continuity of governance for the residents of Bozeman.
III. Independent Citizens' Redistricting Advisory Board
Ward boundaries determine who represents Bozeman residents and how effectively everyneighborhood's voice is heard. When those boundaries are drawn by elected officials
themselves, the risk of manipulation, intentional or not, is real and well-documented. I urgethe 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 anindependent Citizens’ Redistricting Advisory Board consisting of five (5) members who are
qualified electors domiciled within the city limits of Bozeman. No elected official, cityemployee, 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, ensuringgeographic diversity across 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 shallbe compact, contiguous, and the population disparity between wards shall not exceed ten
percent (10%) at the time of any boundary determination. Boundaries of each ward shall becompact, contiguous, as nearly equal in population as practicable, and shall preserve existing
Neighborhood Association boundaries to the maximum extent feasible. No ward shall bedrawn for the purpose of favoring or discriminating against any political party of incumbent
officeholder; provided, however, that no boundary alteration shall exclude an incumbentcommissioner 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 candidatefiling 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 anopen, transparent manner and shall hold a minimum of two (2) public hearings before
finalizing any ward map. The Board shall complete and file its initial recommended wardboundaries 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 thepublication of each decennial federal census thereafter or sooner if the population disparity is
found to exceed ten percent (10%). Upon adoption of the boundaries by ordinance, the wardboundaries 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 corrupted redistricting processes in citiesand 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 capand the requirement for compact, contiguous wards protect the principle of equal
representation and is standard practice. Preserving Neighborhood Association boundarieskeeps established communities intact and offers consistent representation throughout the
neighborhood. And the requirement for at least two public hearings before any map isfinalized ensures residents have a genuine opportunity to weigh in. The number of wards, four
or six, is appropriately left to voters to decide in November; what matters is that whichevernumber 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.
This is our last change to do the right thing to save this city.
Sincerely,Bradley & Lynne Thome