bozeman issues

Bozeman voters asked for change. Vote for the amended charter, six commissioners plus the mayor, wards, and ward-only elections.

Local Vocals’ Bozeman voter guide to the four related charter questions on the November 3, 2026 ballot—and why the sub-options only count if the charter passes.

This Thursday, January 28, the Bozeman Study Commission will be meeting and deciding on the following issues: Deputy Mayor: Section 2.03 (b) eliminate Deputy Mayor position LV position: YES eliminate Deputy Mayor position Partisanship: Section 6.01 (a) Election of Mayor and Commissioners will continue to be nonpartisan or switch to partisan LV position: Switch to partisan (a long shot) Filling Commissioner Vacancies: Section 2.06 (c) Filling of Vacancies shall occur within ___ days LV position: 30 days Other Elected Offices: Article IV LV position: elected Sheriff (as is) elected City Attorney (a change from what is) Duties of Commissioners: Should there be a change in Section 2.01? Options include: keep it the same, make a comprehensive list, or state that the Commissioners must write a job description and then review it every 5 years. LV position is to define as part-time (see below) Number of Commissioners and Part-time/Full-time LV position keep at five and keep part-time Do we want Citizen Representation? Do we want the ability for Commissioners to work in Citizen Representation is part time, yes we want commissioners to live and work under the policies they put in place. Bozeman? Mayor part-time/full-time: Section 2.03 (b) LV position is to keep as is Dictate salary or describe salary outcome or guidelines. Commissioner part-time/full-time: 2.01 LV Talking Points: Part-time Commissioners: 1. Citizen Representation, Not a Political Class Part-time service reinforces the idea that commissioners are citizens first, not career politicians. When commissioners live and work in the community outside City Hall, they stay grounded in real-world consequences of policy decisions. This helps ensure the commission reflects the diversity of lived experience in the city—business owners, renters, retirees, parents, and workers—not just those able to make politics a full-time job. The City Commissioner position should be clearly defined as a part-time public service role, with compensation reflecting that status and not structured as full-time employment or salaried executive compensation. It should not be within the authority of the commission to redefine the office for its own benefit. 2. Prevents Professionalization of Local Politics 3. Strengthens Accountability to the Public Full-time positions can unintentionally turn local government into a career ladder, rather than a temporary civic duty. Part-time roles reduce incentives to make decisions based on job preservation, benefits, or future political ambitions. This preserves independence and reduces susceptibility to institutional groupthink. Commissioners who earn their primary income outside city government are less insulated from the effects of taxes, regulations, and service delivery. They experience city policies the same way residents do—as taxpayers, customers, property owners, or employees—creating natural accountability. 4. Clarifies Roles Between Policy and Administration A part-time commission reinforces the proper division of labor: Commissioners set policy and direction Professional staff implement and manage operations This helps avoid micromanagement and protects against commissioners drifting into administrative roles that belong with city staff. 5. Encourages Focus on Core Responsibilities Limited time encourages commissioners to focus on high-level policy decisions, priorities, and oversight rather than day-to-day operational detail. This can lead to better preparation, clearer agendas, and more disciplined decision-making. 6. Expands Who Can Serve Full-time positions with modest pay can unintentionally limit service to: retirees, independently wealthy individuals, or those seeking political careers. Part-time service—especially when paired with reasonable compensation—can broaden participation and lower barriers to entry. 7. Reduces Cost and Perception of Self-Interest Part-time roles reduce pressure to justify higher salaries, benefits, and staff support. This helps maintain public trust by reinforcing that service is about stewardship, not personal advancement. 8. Aligns with Montana’s Tradition of Citizen Government Montana has a long tradition of citizen legislators and local officials who serve while maintaining careers and community ties. Part-time service is consistent with that cultural and historical model of governance.

THE FACTS The City Commission is considering a proposal from the Associated Students of Montana State University (ASMSU) to create a non-voting, ex-officio student seat on every “Super Advisory Board” in the City of Bozeman. According to the staff memo, these seats would: Be designated for MSU students (nominated and trained by ASMSU) Represent “student interests” on city policy issues Participate in discussions but not vote Produce “official student opinions” and collaborate across boards Require no fiscal impact  WHY IT MATTERS Even without voting power, presence and participation on advisory boards shape the direction of policy. Advisory boards don’t just vote—they set the agenda, frame the debate, and influence staff and commissioners long before items reach the final vote. Key concerns: 1. Transient population, permanent influence Students are in Bozeman temporarily. Their priorities often reflect short-term, student-centered concerns—not the long-term stability, fiscal responsibility, or property implications residents live with for decades. 2. No skin in the game Most students are not taxpayers , do not pay property taxes, and will not bear the cost of the policies they influence. Yet advisory boards shape ordinances for housing, transportation, zoning, climate plans, spending priorities, and more. 3. Unequal representation Creating designated seats for one demographic elevates that demographic above all others. No other group—seniors, small landlords, homeowners, business owners, low-income families—has guaranteed seats on every advisory board. 4. It teaches the wrong lesson about civic engagement The democratic process is based on showing up, applying, serving, and earning a seat—not being granted automatic representation because of age or affiliation. This proposal teaches students that their voice is owed, not earned. 5. Advisory board influence is real Even without voting rights, ex-officio members: Shape narratives Push staff recommendations Influence public opinion Change the direction of policy conversations This is influence without accountability. 6. Risk of political capture Student political organizations—whether progressive or conservative—change yearly. These seats risk being used as rotating ideological footholds on every advisory board in the city. WHAT YOU CAN DO 1. Submit a written comment 2 . Attend the meeting in person Showing up matters. Commissioners react to the room. 3. Give public comment (even 30 seconds helps) You can pick a single point and expand on it. For example: “I support student engagement, but not special representation that elevates one group over others. Advisory boards should represent the residents who live with the consequences of policy.” 4. Share this Alert with neighbors Many don’t know this is happening. Awareness is our strongest tool. 5. Ask the Commission to expand public participation without creating permanent demographic seats For example: Promote advisory board openings to all young adults Create optional student liaisons on an as-needed basis Hold joint listening sessions with students instead of giving permanent positions.