HomeMy WebLinkAboutA4. Analysis CommPage 1 of 7
Commission Memorandum
REPORT TO: Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM: Chris Kukulski, City Manager
Wendy Thomas, Community Development Director Brit Fontenot, Economic Development Director
Anna Rosenberry, Administrative Services Director
Mitch Overton, Director of Parks & Recreation
SUBJECT: Analysis of Community Involvement Processes
DATE: June 15, 2015
RECOMMENDATION: Develop a two year pilot program to create temporary Task Advisory
Committees to replace a select number of Citizen Advisory Boards and make other changes to advisory boards as recommended. Advisory Boards recommended for cessation are: Audit
Committee, Band Board, Beautification Advisory Board, and possibly the Wetlands Review
Board. Please see recommendations for advisory board changes for further details and
recommendations.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The City of Bozeman has created and implemented successful
programs to provide ample opportunity for citizens across generations to engage and participate
in their government. At the time these systems were implemented, in person board/committee
meetings, public meeting attendance, and written correspondence were the way for citizens to
engage. The City Commission should consider evolving local government engagement from this traditional form of seeking input and feedback to a form that aligns with the needs and
preferences of generations that show strong preferences for different methods to communicate
and engage. The challenge for us is to find ways to provide engagement opportunity for both
digital natives and digital adapters. By not creating a governmental architecture to support the
needs of both groups, we will fail to provide ample opportunity for citizen engagement. As we continue to move from rigid structures that adhere to a past rooted in antiquated technology and
processes, we should re-examine how we will ensure we are responsive to the needs of the
community.
Our challenge is to balance the desire for heightened citizen engagement with the pace of modern life. Many board and commissions struggle with keeping members, quorums and
producing measureable results. Members express frustration that the boards seem to accomplish
little of value in a reasonable time, meetings seem to have little focus, and members lose interest.
459
Page 2 of 7
Staff recommends eliminating boards that no longer serve the needed purpose or if the purpose
of the board could be met in an alternate way. Replace monthly “rote” meetings with task
focused meetings over a shortened time period. More fully utilize the expertise of board
members to develop and recommend policy or program changes to quickly meet the needs of the community.
BACKGROUND: The City of Bozeman values citizen engagement. An outgrowth of this
commitment is the 30 different citizen advisory boards, addressing a wide range of topics. Most
of the boards were created to make recommendations to staff and the City Commission as representatives of our citizenry. Many boards and committees are set up per state statute and are required for the management of city programs such as tax increment districts. Traditionally,
citizen advisory boards have been the City of Bozeman’s primary method to garner citizen
participation and feedback.
Efficacy of Advisory Boards
Staff has undertaken an examination of the mission of the current boards to determine whether
those missions are being fully realized. In addition, staff has undertaken a preliminary
evaluation of the costs for ongoing board management and support. After careful consideration, staff has determined that the standard board model, in some cases, may no longer be the most
efficient method to engage the community.
Advisory boards offer a means for citizens to participate in city government, but we are finding
they also have many limitations including:
• Members often do not feel their participation is meaningful.
• Do the members truly represent the community at large?
• Information relayed to board members from staff is not effectively relayed throughout the community.
• Non-members rarely participate and may feel excluded from the process.
• Over time, boards may require a disproportionate amount of staff time and energy.
Community Development alone spends 35% of overall staff time managing community development related boards.
• Long and multiple terms often result in low enthusiasm or malaise.
• Often very little follow up happens between or away from the meetings.
• When a specific project or review is not needed, boards may be meeting just for the sake
of meeting.
Other Current Participation Methods: Public Comment: The most common form of community participation is through public
comment. This method works well if citizens are well informed, the comments are thoughtfully
considered, and the project is not very complex. It is an ongoing challenge for staff to relay
information in a multitude of ways and try to get information to the people who are most
460
Page 3 of 7
interested. If done effectively however, this method can offer people a way to voice their opinion
directly.
Public comment can be garnered in several ways. One way is through direct comments to the Commission and staff through e-mail, letters and at public hearings and meetings. These comments are prompted by current events, agenda items and community member’s personal
experiences. It is vital that we maximize our outreach in order to inform people of upcoming
agenda items and decisions for this method to be more effective.
The second method to garner public comment is through Bozeman Online City Hall. This method helps the city ask people about specific topics the administration would like to gain
insight about. This method can focus feedback allowing staff to streamline questions to focus on
problems and solutions that are feasible and relevant within current constraints. Staff can also
provide background information on the topic which can increase the quality of feedback and also serves as a way to disseminate information about the topic. In many cases, this is a great way to involve and inform the community. Limitations include the difficulties of increasing knowledge
of this method and possible lack of interest. Like other forms of gathering public comment,
Bozeman Online City Hall is useful for understanding how citizens feel about issues, but it not
designed to solicit solutions for highly complex issues. Proposal for Temporary Action Committees:
Best practice research, and successful implementation by various local governments, has shown
that advisory board participation is not in some cases the most engaging way for citizens to become involved in local government. While advisory boards may be appropriate, in some
situations, other methods may be more effective. Focused participation, addressing a narrow
subject area, is a results oriented process that allows community members to inform and make
recommendations to decision makers.
When the city wants to involve the community to help solve complex issues or complete specific
tasks a temporary, short term action committee is best. These groups are focused on creating
recommendations through an intense, short term, results-oriented process.
Temporary action committees:
• Solve one problem or task which is clearly defined
• Are charged with creating a final deliverable
• Are convened for a limited period of time, four to eight times
• Meetings are focused, intense, short, and results-oriented
• Write all the agendas, minutes, reports, etc.
• Call upon staff person and other members of the community as subject area experts
• Utilize a trained facilitator to ensure focus and progress
A modified version of an action committee was recently used to propose amendments to the
Neighborhood Conservation Overly District Design Guidelines. In two months we progressed
461
Page 4 of 7
from identification of an issue to bringing a resolution to the City Commission requesting
approval of amendments. The new process was innovative, timely, responsive, and results-
oriented. The new process was, at times, a challenge to the participants, I believe largely
because it was unlike anything they had participated in before. However, as a participant, I found the end result highly desirable. We will continue to get better at the process as we gain experience.
Advisory Board Management Recommendations
While some of the boards are functioning well for their intended purpose and others are
mandatory by state statute; changes are recommended for others. Recommendations are offered
per board or committee as one size does not fit all. Disbandment of some of the boards on a
temporary basis is recommended. This would entail a two year hiatus. This break would allow time to establish temporary working groups and learn whether they are a more efficient model or
determine more definitively whether a board is no longer needed. After a year, the City
Commission could evaluate whether a permanent dissolution of a particular board is warranted.
Mandatory Boards Many of the boards are mandatory by state statute. City staff is not suggesting any changes to
these boards. They include:
• Board of Ethics (Charter Mandate)
• Bozeman Tourism Business Improvement District Board
• City Planning Board
• Downtown Bozeman Improvement District (BID) Board
• Downtown Business Improvement/Tax Increment Finance (TIF) Board
• Fire Code Board of Appeals
• Impact Fee Advisory Committee
• Library Board of Trustees
• Northeast Urban Renewal Board
• North Seventh Urban Renewal Board
• Parking Commission
• Police Commission
• Prospera Revolving Loan Fund Committee
• South Bozeman Technology District Board
• Zoning Commission
In addition, there are joint boards/combined boards with other public entities. It is not recommended that the City attempt to disengage from these boards as the City does not manage these boards and the board would continue to operate but would do so without City
representation. These include:
• City-County Board of Health
• Gallatin Local Water Quality District Board
462
Page 5 of 7
• Pedestrian and Traffic Safety Committee (created through Interlocal Agreement)
• Transportation Coordinating Committee (created through Memorandum of Understanding)
Recommendations for Advisory Board Changes
Below are recommendations regarding the advisability of dissolution or alterations to the existing board structure with alternative forms of engagement listed.
• Audit Committee - Recommend disbanding
Reasoning: The selection of an auditor, the audit process and the budget are all conducted
in a very open manner. The citizen positions are extremely hard to fill because this Committee is only needed for one or two meetings per year and the transparent nature of
the process makes this Committee unnecessary. The majority of the Audit Committee
consists of city staff.
• Band Board - Recommend disbanding Reasoning: The city Band has been managing itself as a separate entity. They do not
require staff assistance. The Municipal Band has been submitting a yearly invoice and
has been treated by the finance department as a vendor. This could continue. If the band
were to become more of an independent entity, they could become a nonprofit and raise additional money.
• Beautification Advisory Board - Recommend disbanding or temporary suspension
with the possibility of creating a Temporary Action Committee to create a format
for beautification awards or having The Inter-Neighborhood Council handle the awards Reasoning: The Beautification Board has several projects they work on each year -
Beautification Awards and helping with Clean-Up Day. They rely heavily on staff to put
everything together for the Beautification Awards. It may be possible to merge this award
program with the Historic Preservation award program. While it is helpful to have board members help with Clean-Up Day, they can still volunteer without being on the board.
Staff does not feel that the staff time invested in this board is commensurate with the
deliverables. The Inter-Neighborhood Council could assist with the Beautification
Awards and other beautification events and Online City Hall could be utilized as a voting
mechanism for Beautification Awards. This group could also exist without any formal relationship with the City government.
• Bozeman Area Bicycle Advisory Board - Recommend No Changes
Reasoning: This board is functioning quite well and accomplishing many tasks that would otherwise not happen. While a staff member does attend the meetings, he does so
as a resource expert and does not prepare agendas or minutes. He spends minimal time
managing this board.
463
Page 6 of 7
• Bozeman Historic Preservation Advisory Board - Recommend meetings only twice a
year with the possibility of creating a Temporary Action Committee when specific
deliverables are needed. Reasoning: This board is required for an annual state grant. The Board requires extensive staff time and is continually challenged in meeting the quorum requirements. Tasks that
may come up in this arena may be better suited to a temporary action committee that
would have a clear purpose and completion. For example, the Commission asked the
board to create an awards program in 2012. This task took 26 months. The award program could have been a good item to be addressed by an action committee. The City could also ask current community groups such as the Historical Society or Living History
Project to weigh in on historical issues that arise. Online City Hall could also be utilized
to ask for specific feedback. The board could be scaled back in size and in meetings and
still meet state grant requirements by only meeting several times a year or quarterly.
• Cemetery Advisory Board - Recommend No Changes Reasoning: This Board meets quarterly. Approximately 24 hours is spent yearly for
administration of this board. This does not include time spent by leadership attending meetings, etc. This Board has currently been working on funding recommendations for completion of the Vietnam Memorial Wall and planning for an official SW Montana
Veterans Cemetery. This Board (and Tree Board) could potentially be combined into the
Recreation and Parks Advisory Board in the future.
• Community Affordable Housing Advisory Board - Recommend Quarterly meetings or as needed after creation of an affordable housing ordinance.
Reasoning: A new affordable housing ordinance is in process by this board. After the
completion of this task, the board could meet quarterly or as needed for specific projects.
• Design Review Board - Recommend No Changes
Reasoning: This board provides important design feedback and is currently required by
the Unified Development Code. The board meets “on demand”. Having architects and
other experts in the field available for feedback is important as the office of Community Development does not currently have employees with this type of expertise.
• Economic Development Council - Recommend No Changes
Reasoning: Economic Development Director Brit Fontenot indicated he appreciates
having access to a group of community leaders for the sharing of information. Having this Council in place also makes it much easier for him to ask for volunteers to serve on
sub-committees that can handle more intense projects. Meetings once a month however
became unnecessary. The Council voted to meet quarterly during their October meeting.
Sub-committees may be set up as needed that will work similar to action committees with a clear objective, time frame and expected commitment. The Economic Development Director can also call meetings more regularly as needed.
464
Page 7 of 7
• Recreation and Parks Advisory Board - Recommend further encouragement of a non-
profit Friends of the Park group.
Reasoning: Parks and Recreation Director Mitch Overton said there has been interest within the community in starting a nonprofit Friends of the Parks (or similar) group that could fundraise and have more flexibility than a traditional city board. He plans on
working with community members to further this idea. If the Tree Advisory Board is
disbanded, this board would satisfy requirements of Tree City USA designation.
• Trails, Open Space and Parks Committee - Recommend No Changes
Reasoning: This Committee was specifically created to assist in the implementation of
the Parks, Trails, and Open Space Bond approved by the voters in 2012. This Committee
meets as needed for that purpose and when the Bond money has been fully used the Committee will be disbanded.
• Tree Advisory Board - Recommend formally making meetings Quarterly
Reasoning: This board (or another so designated) needs to be in place to qualify for Tree
City USA designation. The board does not take much staff time or resources and rarely meets more than quarterly. A tree master plan has been undertaken so this board will be
valuable for feedback on the plan.
• Wetlands Review Board - Recommend Examining Contractual Possibilities Reasoning: This board meets as needed to review wetland issues for the Community Development Department. The board is made up of experts in the field and provides
valuable feedback in this area. Staff recommends determining whether contracting with a
wetland professional for these reviews would be advantageous.
ALTERNATIVES: As suggested by the City Commission
465