Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-14-05 Minutes, Study CommissionMINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA LOCAL GOVERNMENT STUDY COMMISSION June 14, 2005 The Study Commission met in regular session in the Commission Room, Municipal Building, at 7:00 p.m. on Tuesday, June 14, 2005. Present were Chair Loren Olsen, Brian Close, Bill Hayward, Marilou Turrentine and John Trull. Also present was Clerk of the Commission Robin Sullivan. Those present from the public included Sean Becker, Kaaren Jacobson and Joan Rudberg. The meeting was called to order by Chair Loren Olsen. Minutes - March 15, May 10 and May 24, 2005 Brian Close stated he will e-mail Celeste with clarification of his comments at the May 24, and she can then adjust those minutes as necessary. Marilou Turrentine reported she has changes to the May 10 minutes. Loren Olsen reported that the minutes from the March 15 meeting are now in rough form and asked that Brian Close and Bill Hayward assist him in finalizing them. Loren Olsen tabled action on the three sets of minutes to the next meeting Public comment No comment was received under this agenda item. Overview of recent trainina from Ken Weaver Marilou Turrentine reported on the recent training that she and John Trull attended. She noted that Ken Weaver stressed the importance of being careful about the language in the charter and ensuring the proper certificates are included with the Study Commission's final report. She then requested a copy of the charter from which Brian Close is working and, upon learning that the National Civic League's model charter is the basis for the working draft charter, asked for a copy of the charter prepared by Ken Weaver several years ago. Brian Close noted he has three versions of the working draft charter on his computer and will forward them via e-mail. He then recognized that the Study Commission made some decisions in March that neither Marilou nor John were involved in and suggested a review of the National Civic League model charter and the previous decisions might be in order prior to moving forward again. John Trull reported that Ken Weaver also stressed the importance of including transition articles in the final documents. He concluded by noting it is important to contact Clerk and Recorder Shelley Vance to find out if the Study Commission's recommendation can be included on the June 2006 ballot. Chair Loren Olsen thanked Marilou and John for their report, noting this training should assist them as the process moves forward. Citizen iury subcommittee discussion Bill Hayward reported that he and John Trull met with Neighborhood Coordinator Tracy Oulman. He noted that she gave them a small booklet explaining experiences from three case studies in Australia, where the term "jury" is used instead of citizen panel. He briefly outlined the underlying premises and the process, which involves randomly selected participants within a predetermined structure that satisfies a cross-section of the populace based on the census. Those selected sit on a panel and hear all sides involved in the identified issue, listening to presentations from the various stakeholders through a mediated process. While the public is invited to attend the "hearing", they are not allowed to speak. Mr. Hayward reported that this process cost approximately $50,000 in Australian dollars, but the result was a sense of community participation. He noted this seems to be a very rational way to approach the public on a relatively modest budget; and Neighborhood Coordinator Oulman has suggested she may be able to contribute the mediation services for the process. He also stated the results would be valid and raise community awareness of the study commission process. With David Smith's arrival, the Study Commission suspended further discussion of this process to listen to his presentation. David Smith - Bozeman Area Chamber of Commere Mr. David Smith, Executive Director of the Bozeman Area Chamber of Commerce, distributed a letter forwarding issues and ideas for Study Commission consideration. He stressed that this list has been developed by a board representing over 1,000 local businesses and a diverse spectrum of views, and is not in any specific priority order. 1. Capital improvement plan that has annual public review. David stated the Chamber Board would like to see public involvement and feedback on the capital improvement plan, which could alleviate the concerns that arise when a huge utility rate increase is proposed because the public would be better informed of impending needs. He acknowledged former City Manager Johnson's efforts to get a capital improvement plan in place but suggested that could be expanded upon. 2 Public vote on unbudgeted items exceeding a certain amount. David cited purchase of the SAE House as an example, stating he does not believe spending $1.5 million from the City coffers after holding a public hearing with sixty people in attendance is the best way to conduct business. He stressed the importance of a public process, even if a vote is not included, especially when the City's savings account is being expended. 3. There should be a limit on government spending —any excess must be voted on by the public. David suggested that government spending should not exceed the CPI plus the amount of growth in the community and, if it does, there should be valid reasons for doing so. -2- 4. Boards and commissions. David noted the Chamber hears a lot about the length of time it takes to complete the development review process and the number of boards involved. He suggested that the Design Review Board be eliminated and that the staff be empowered to administratively handle more projects under the unified development ordinance. He cited last night's Commission meeting as an example of time being devoted to two big picture issues rather than considering development projects that could have been decided by other bodies. David also stated that one person should not be allowed to stack a board, noting the Chamber does not believe the chair should have a greater impact than any other member of the board. He also suggested that there be term limits on serving, which will result in new members and a more invigorated board. Brian Close responded that the only appointments made by the Mayor result from statutory requirements. 5. A reserve fund should be required. David stated the Chamber feels strongly that a reserve fund should be required, and could be based on a number of options, including a percentage of the budget or assessed valuation. He noted that the amount in the reserve affects the City's bond capacity and bond ratings which, in turn, affects the taxpayers. Brian Close noted that, in reviewing budget issues, the Study Commission has found there are many unwritten policies in place. Bill Hayward noted the City budget encompasses several different funds that are very segregated. He stressed that this precludes the ability to move monies around, particularly since some of those monies are legally restricted. David Smith acknowledged those restrictions. He then noted many members of the Chamber are concerned that the City had the ability expend $3 million in cash from the solid waste fund to acquire the Mandeville Farm. 6. Duties of commissioners should be clearly defined in a charter. David noted the City Commission should operate as a board, representing a cross-section of the community, and set policy and goals. He noted the City spends a lot of money on a City Manager, and he should be allowed to manage the organization. 7. Language should be included to address professional and ethical conduct by elected and appointed officials. 8. The Mayor should not have exclusive appointments to boards. The number of Commissioners should remain the same. 9. Commissioners should continue to be elected at large although, as the geography of the city expands, wards should be considered. David recognized that the creation of wards carries with it the potential that several incredibly talented people may run from one ward while another has a difficult time attracting a marginal candidate. Brian Close noted that he had previously advocated wards but has since turned his attention to the idea of preferential voting. He noted this process has a tendency to strengthen the middle and minimizing the extremes. -3- 10. Mayor's job description should be clearly as chair of the board. Leave the structure as it is, since it allows the Mayor to have some experience before stepping into that role. 11. Campaign spending limits are set in State statute and should be the limit for municipal elections. 12. Cablecast or webcast public meetings, thus allowing greater citizen knowledge and participation. David Smith noted that many of the last points are self-explanatory. He then stressed that the first five points are extremely important and asked the Study Commission to give them serious consideration. He noted this list represents dozens of manhours by members of the Chamber. Brian Close offered to forward the National Civic League model charter and its commentary; David Smith expressed an interest in reviewing that document. Chair Loren Olsen noted the Study Commission is preparing to identify topics to be considered at specific meetings and stressed the importance of receiving public input on those topics. Responding to questions from Bill Hayward, David Smith indicated that the issues of strong versus weak mayor and the Commissioners electing the chair are low on the Chamber's radar screen. David Smith then noted it is important that the capital improvement plan be a flexible document, but stressed that it serves as a road map for the future. He observed that one cannot drive forward when "looking in the rear view mirror". He recognized the Commission is better able to determine basic infrastructure needs, including water and sewer, than the general public. Bill Hayward noted that the City Commission is responsible for the public health, safety and welfare of the community. David Smith noted that at the Bozeman on the Move meeting a few weeks ago, the group discussed the possibility of creating a loose knit group that represents a broad spectrum of the community and gets together once a month to discuss ideas and issues. He stated this process takes issues out of the political realm and places them in a community, non -partisan forum that provides the opportunity for discussion but does not result in any resolution. Chair Loren Olsen thanked David Smith for presentation of the Chamber's input. Citizen jury subcommittee discussion (continued) John Trull suggested that a select group of Bozeman voters be identified and that they be given a single agenda item on which to provide comment. He noted that, after the "hearing" process, the "jury", or citizen panel, would give one opinion. Once the citizen panel is selected, they would be given a topic and a date on which to consider it. He then asked the Commissioners to provide feedback on a number of questions that had been identified in an e-mail distributed prior to the meeting. The Study Commissioners agreed with the proposed citizen panel comprised of fifteen members. They recognized that, if possible, two separate citizen panels should be created, thus involving more members of the community. They also chose the dates of October 4 and November 1 on which to conduct these panels, at a different venue. Those panels are to last for two hours, and the Study Commission will prepare a package of honest, unbiased information prior to the meetings. The Study Commissioners identified "transparency/communication" and "composition of the commission" as the two topics to be submitted to those citizen panels. Bill Hayward and Marilou Turrentine will prepare the information for the transparency/communication panel; and John Trull and Brian Close will prepare the information for the composition of the commission panel. Each sub -committee will begin preparation of an outline to be reviewed at the meeting June 28 meeting. It was moved by Brian Close, seconded by John Trull, that the Study Commission approve spending of up to $1,000 from the Fiscal Year 2005-2006 budget for the citizen panel/jury, subject to Commission approval of the budget. The motion carried. Discuss the new timeline Brian Close noted that copies of the new timeline have been distributed to the Study Commissioners. He asked that the meetings for July and August be set at this time, noting the rest of the calendar can be adjusted based on the actions of the citizen panels. Loren Olsen asked that the second meeting in July be devoted to discussion with the Planning Board. Brian Close suggested that "Charter 101" be the topic for a work session during the first meeting in August, since John will be absent from the first meeting in July. The first meeting in July is to be devoted to starting the draft report and draft charter. Brian Close stated he will work on the timeline based on this discussion and submit a revised timeline for consideration at the next meeting. Discuss charter draft and final report draft Chair Loren Olsen noted this item was covered in the previous discussion. He then suggested that the draft reports be posted on the website for public review and updated as changes occur. Next op-ed topic Loren Olsen indicated he will prepare an editorial on the weak Mayor form of government, relying on information gathered from Ken Weaver, noting that this is the current form of government. New business Marilou Turrentine reported that she had received a call from Anita Saunders, who is concerned about the transfer station, the lack of communication, and the feeling that its location was "a done deal" before the neighbors found out about it. Bill Hayward reported that he has been communicating with Commissioner Jeff Krauss about the financial section of the charter. Confirm date of next meeting -5- The next meeting is to be held on Tuesday, June 28, in Conference Room. Adjournment - 10:00 p.m. There being no further business to come before the Commission at this time, it was moved by Brian Close, seconded by Marilou Turrentine, that the meeting be adjourned. The motion carried. LOREN OLSEN, Chair RI - ROBIN L. SULLIVAN Clerk of the Commission