Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-28-06 Minutes, Study CommissionMINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA LOCAL GOVERNMENT STUDY COMMISSION March 28, 2006 The Study Commission met in special session in the Conference Room, Municipal Building, at 7:00 p.m. on Tuesday, March 28, 2006. Present were Chair Loren Olsen, Bill Hayward, and Harold Fryslie. Excused from the meeting was Marilou Turrentine and Brian Close. Also present was Secretary of the Study Commission Celeste Janssen and Professor Steve Swinford. John Trull attended as a member of the public. The meeting was called to order by Chair Loren Olsen at 7:04 pm. Public comment There was no public comment at the time. Survey Discussion with Professor Steve Swimford Professor Steve Swinford introduced himself. He met with the subcommittee (Harold Fryslie and Loren Olsen) yesterday. LOGISTICS The survey will be sent with a cover letter, either separate or printed on the back depending on postage. There will also be an enclosed stamped envelope. Professor Swinford explained that metered mail has a lower return rate, because the stamp is a form of "personalization" and investment. Along similar lines, Loren's signature and using a heavier, textured paper will also increase the response rate. The survey will only be sent to people on the active voter rolls and not to those who are about to be dropped. Bozeman has approximately 17,000 on the voter list to sample from, and the survey needs 376 responses in order to be sure of the results within plus or minus five percentage points. The Study Commission could choose to send out a 1,000 and hope to get the 376 needed. The cost would be $780 (considering two stamps per piece for 1000 people.) If the Study Commission chose to do metered mail, Professor Swinford suggested sending out 1,200. In terms of statistics, it is better to send out fewer surveys and get more back. Costs other than stamps will be printing ($150 range), paper, envelopes ($150 range), labor to enter the data and process it, and any fee that the Professor would charge, and the mandatory University fee. His fee is deeply discounted, because part of the Study Commission's survey will help him with his research. The estimated total is approximately $2,000 or $2,200. Professor Swinford explained that the timeframe is working against the Study Commission. The University press is on a week backlog, so printing might be quicker elsewhere. The bulk of the surveys will come back immediately, but one month is still tight. Professor Swinford asked for the Study Commission to decide if the mail should come from and be sent to the City of Bozeman or the University. There are merits to both, and people respond differently. The data would not be compromised either way. Bill Hayward said he would be more inclined to open an unusual letter from the City of Bozeman than another piece of mail from MSU. With survey responses, logistically it would be easier to have the surveys go directly to the University. Also, if the public is wary of "cooking" results, they might prefer the data going to the impartial University. Everyone supported having the survey sent from the City of Bozeman and returned to the MSU Sociology Department. The Study Commission can save money by using 1,000 number ten envelopes from the City. Professor Swinford will put a large, empty box on half of the surveys, in the place of the blank space. His experiment will look at if either the blank space or the box affect how much is written, or if there is a difference in the response rate. CONTENT OF SURVEY Professor Swinford presented two versions of the survey for the Study Commission. He is in favor of using the survey with five questions (instead of six). Less questions is better. Also, on the version with five questions, people must rank systems. On the other version, people could choose to give the same preference to all three choices. On the version with five questions, there are only three categories, so the order of the choices should not affect response. (If there were six or seven choices, the choices would need to be rotated throughout the surveys.) The Study Commission all agreed that the survey with five questions is preferred. The first question on the preferred survey asks for individuals to rank different systems for the election of the mayor. The current system is described at the top of the page. It is also a choice in the first question, although Professor Swinford pointed out that it would unwise to tell people which is the current method while asking for ranking, because it might bias. Bill Hayward asked if the current system should be listed as a choice or not. Professor Swinford said that because question number two is open-ended, people who love the current system or dislike the current system may say so there. Bill Hayward offered a suggestion for changing the first sentence by adding the word "prior'. Loren Olsen suggested adding "mayor elect" on the explanation of the current system. Loren Olsen asked if the Study Commission wanted to find out what the support is for the current system, or wanted to look at what is the best subvote? Would the Study Commission like to remove our current system as a choice, and instead add "the mayor is elected by the Commission." The current plan is have a subvote on the charter, between our current system and one other choice. Because we are looking for what is the best second choice for the ballot, Mr. Olsen doesn't think the current system should be one of the choices. Bill Hayward would like have it included, to see the urgency of change. Loren Olsen said that as for his personal favorite, he is most comfortable with staying with our current system. His second choice is two year terms for a directly -elected mayor, followed closely by the Commission choosing its own mayor. Chair Olsen's least favorite system is the directly -elected mayor with a 4 year term because it moves Bozeman towards a strong mayor system. Harold Fryslie said that his personal preferences are the same as Mr. Olsen's. If the City Commission is responsible for electing their mayor, that individual will be elevated to a superior status. For all the years that Mr. Fryslie worked for the City of Bozeman, the Commission has gone to great lengths to work as equals. John Trull suggested that the four year option be struck from the survey, because it is the most common election of the mayor in other cities. If someone were apathetic to making a choice, the easiest vote would be for a four-year mayor without understanding Bozeman's City Manager. Professor Swinford said the language of question one can be modified and made stronger. If the current system is removed as a choice, then it can say something to the effect "rank three things that Bozeman doesn't presently use, but could." If people very much like the current system, they may not answer the question and then will write in question two that they prefer the current system. Professor Swinford added question three (How many hours do you think a Commissioner should spend on City business per week) because of his conversation with Loren Olsen. Bill Hayward asked what will be the difference if the answer ends up being ten hours versus forty hours? He recommended removing the question. Loren Olsen and Harold Fryslie agreed that the answer wouldn't affect anything, and therefore the question will be removed. The Study Commission talked about adding another question about the current system, but didn't want it contaminating the first question. The question could say "After seeing the options, I would prefer the current system." That question could become number two, and then the current number two would be moved to number three: "Please share any additional comments you have about the selection methods presented above." Harold Fryslie stated support. Question number four is about moving number of commissioners from five to seven. Bill Hayward's first thought is when would the increase be? What are is the Study Commission trying to figure out? The question could read, "If the 2010 census shows that Bozeman has reached 40,000 from five to seven?". Professor Swinford doesn't like that wording, because you've already set up one question about population increase, and then you've got the other question about commissioner's increasing. Trigger events require setting up the question, and a critic could say the response was also set up. Bill Hayward said that what question does the Study Commission want answered. Harold Fryslie said that he doesn't think the Study Commission wants an answer, because it has been answered by the Citizen Panel, which showed support for the increase. The Professor said that removing the question wouldn't affect the validity of the survey by making it too short. Professor Swinford said the Study Commission shouldn't run an article in the Chronicle about the survey, because that would skew the results towards people who read the paper versus people who didn't. It would be okay to do newspaper or radio exposure about two weeks after the surveys were sent. Professor Swinford said the "return by date" should go in the letter. The University will require that there is contact information, so that people can ask questions if they have any. The Sociology Department has a phone set up. Loren Olsen suggested asking for a return within three business days. The Professor would like to have a ten day window for collecting the data. The biggest data problem is getting the list to sample from. On a perfect timeline, surveys could start going out on April 5th or 6th. April 10th is a bit safer The Professor can give the Study Commission the collected results by 25th of April. If there is a low response rate, the timeline would need to be stretched out. Loren Olsen said he would like Professor Swinford to modify the survey as discussed tonight. The updated survey will be emailed to everyone. Harold Fryslie motioned to approve the survey as discussed tonight, with a cover letter written subject to Loren Olsen's review. Bill Hayward seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. Bill Hayward motioned to approve up to $2,500 for the survey, and Harold Fryslie seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Outline Draft Report and Charter topics These items will be tabled until the next meeting. New business Bill Hayward will be out of town on the May 6th meeting (he will be gone from May 1 to May 10.) Loren Olsen informed the Study Commission of the changes in the secretary position. Celeste Janssen will take a leave of absence from May 17, 2006 to October 1, 2006. In her absence, Robin Sullivan will be appointed to fulfill the needs of the Study Commission as Secretary. Camden Easterling may write an article on the Study Commission and Charter. Loren Olsen has spoken with her. Loren Olsen also informed everyone that the City Commission cannot meet on May 8th. The Study Commission could do May 15th instead. Loren Olsen will check with the City Commission. Loren Olsen also reported that David Smith with the Chamber of Commerce asked if the Study Commission would do an "Eggs and Issues" meeting on the Charter. This will be discussed at the next meeting. Confirm date for next meeting April 13th at 7 pm in the Conference Room of the Municipal Building. Adjournment at 9:12 pm There being no further business at this time, it was moved by Harold Fryslie, seconded by Bill Hayward, that the meeting be adjourned. The motion carried unanimously. LOREN OLSEN, Chair ATTEST: CELESTE JANSSEN, Secretary of the Study Commission