[1:35] [Captioner present]

[5:23] [Captioner present]

[5:30] >> It is 6:00.

[5:32] We are going to go ahead and call this meeting to order,

[5:36] our September 2nd Economic Vitality Board meeting to order.

[5:41] Just a little business and reminder that our meetings

[5:45] are held in person, and you can also

[5:49] access them through our video conferencing system.

[5:51] You can also watch or stream our meetings on channel 190,

[5:57] and you can attend in person.

[5:59] If you have a public comment and you

[6:01] want to do that over the phone the number is 12532050468.

[6:04] Do we have any Disclosures in regards

[6:13] to what we're going to be talking about tonight?

[6:17] Any changes to the agenda?

[6:21] >> No changes.

[6:23] >> I'm going to go over how to give public comment.

[6:26] This is the time to comment by any non-agenda member falling

[6:29] within the scope of the Economic Vitality Board.

[6:32] They will also be a time in conjunction with each agenda

[6:35] item for public comment relating to that item,

[6:38] but you may only speak once per topic.

[6:40] Please note that the board cannot take any item which does

[6:44] not appear on the agenda.

[6:46] All persons addressing the board shall

[6:47] speak in a civil and courteous manner.

[6:50] And members of the audience shall be respectful of others.

[6:54] Please state your name, stay if you are a resident of the city,

[6:58] please state if you are a property owner.

[7:02] And please limit your comments to three minutes.

[7:05] Do we have any public comments in regards to anything?

[7:09] Not related to agenda items.

[7:13] >> I see two members of the public online but they are not

[7:17] raising their hands for public comment.

[7:20] >> Thank you very much for that.

[7:22] We have a wonderful presentation.

[7:24] I'm going to have Brett introduce our presenters

[7:28] tonight.

[7:29] >> So tonight I'd like to introduce Courtney Smith

[7:34] to the podium.

[7:35] She is doing a presentation on belonging in Bozeman.

[7:39] And I will let you provide her with the details of what

[7:43] she's trying to accomplish with you tonight.

[7:46] But welcome Courtney.

[7:47] And thank you for being here.

[7:50] >> Thank you.

[7:51] Good evening, everyone.

[7:53] Tonight I'm presenting on the belonging in Bozeman decision:

[7:58] Making tool.

[8:00] It's a work session and it's very interactive.

[8:02] I definitely appreciate your input and feedback on this.

[8:06] Just a bit of an overview of tonight,

[8:09] we will go through the background of the decision

[8:11] making tool.

[8:13] We will go over the tools, have an example walk through

[8:17] where I will have you walk through the decision making tool

[8:21] with me.

[8:21] And then I have some questions and input from you all on this.

[8:25] A little bit of background, the belonging in Bozeman plan was

[8:30] adopted by the Bozeman City Commission December 19th, 2023.

[8:33] This is in alignment with goal five recommendation one

[8:37] under Community Safety and Civic Health

[8:39] within the Belonging in Bozeman plan

[8:41] to develop a decision making tool

[8:44] and train elected officials, Advisory board members and staff

[8:50] and its use.

[8:51] I think this is a priority for the commission as well.

[8:55] So what is the decision making tool?

[8:58] This is a set of structures -- structured questions that guides

[9:03] the examination of policies, practices and decisions

[9:08] to ensure they align with equal access goals.

[9:11] I will also point out that this decision-making tool shows up

[9:18] in a couple other places within the Belonging in Bozeman plan,

[9:22] like our transportation section, to ensure

[9:25] that all of the policies and practices and decisions that

[9:28] are made by leaders within the city government

[9:30] have equal access in mind.

[9:32] So I use this decision making tool?

[9:37] Really, it's to make sure that there's a structured methodology

[9:41] for recognizing, addressing and rectifying

[9:44] disparities and ensuring that decisions are based

[9:47] on data, community engagement, and clear objectives

[9:51] and at advancing our intended outcomes.

[9:54] And it's a valuable resource within government practices.

[9:57] A lot of different government entities

[9:59] utilize this type of tool.

[10:01] We also hope that it addresses root causes of disparities

[10:04] and biases that exist within our community.

[10:09] Another reason why we exist is --

[10:16] why we use the decision making tool can be found by the way

[10:19] of example through the Americans with Disability Act.

[10:22] That was co-created with and by and for people

[10:24] with living with disabilities and expanded upon section 504

[10:27] of the Rehabilitation Act.

[10:29] The focus on accessibility spurred innovation and design

[10:33] and technology leading to products and services

[10:35] that are more easily used by everyone.

[10:38] For example, curb cuts, ramps and accessible restrooms

[10:42] benefit not only people with disabilities

[10:44] but people with strollers, older adults, delivery workers,

[10:48] and travelers with luggage.

[10:50] The electric toothbrushes commonly used by people

[10:53] and was intended originally for people with disabilities.

[10:56] When we target the needs of a particular group,

[10:59] we can actually meet the needs of a variety

[11:01] of groups of people.

[11:03] So that is what this tool is intended to do.

[11:06] You all have a hand in front of you

[11:10] and we will go through each of these questions one by one.

[11:14] But this is an outline of what the decision-making tool looks

[11:20] like.

[11:20] First you'll start with the proposal.

[11:23] What is the policy, program or budget

[11:26] decision under consideration and what are the broad desired

[11:29] outcomes?

[11:30] And example -- for example, all people in Bozeman have x.

[11:36] You'll start with a broad policy that you want for everybody

[11:39] when you're making a decision.

[11:42] Next, you'll look at the data and what is available

[11:47] and what does it tell us.

[11:48] Who is currently well-served and has access?

[11:52] And who does not, and why?

[11:55] Some resources that could help with your decision-making

[12:00] include the belonging in Bozeman data

[12:02] dashboard, even though it needs to be updated.

[12:05] And the belonging in Bozeman plan.

[12:08] We also have community census data and the community survey

[12:13] which informs a lot of data that we

[12:15] utilize within the city as well as the Library of Congress.

[12:18] There are also nonprofit data sources

[12:21] that exist like the Opportunity Atlas and the Kids Count data

[12:25] Center resources.

[12:26] I'll also point that -- point out that disaggregated data is

[12:32] preferable in these types of situations where you look

[12:34] at subgroups that share identifying factors that include

[12:37] but are not limited to race ethnicity, income,

[12:42] languages spoken, gender, geography and disability.

[12:47] And once you select a proposal related to a condition

[12:50] of well-being, we want you to look --

[12:54] you look at that data to reveal some groups that are more

[12:58] or less impacted.

[12:59] The next question asks how have stakeholders been engaged

[13:03] and what does that community engagement process look like?

[13:06] It's especially important to hear from those

[13:08] who will be directly impacted by a decision

[13:10] and whose voices are missing from a conversation,

[13:13] and how we can gain their perspectives.

[13:15] The next question, analysis and strategies.

[13:21] We want to look at who will benefit from the proposal

[13:24] that you have, who will be burdened by that proposal?

[13:28] And are there any strategies for mitigating unintended

[13:31] consequences?

[13:32] And these are some helpful starting considerations

[13:35] that we have here.

[13:38] Next, what is the plan for implementing your policy goals?

[13:43] How will you ensure that the timeline, communications,

[13:47] and the process address the needs of key groups identified

[13:50] above?

[13:55] Lastly, we have accountability and communication.

[14:00] How will you ensure accountability

[14:01] to meeting the proposed goals?

[14:04] How will the results of your proposal be evaluated?

[14:07] And make sure you include checkpoints

[14:10] for reviewing, reporting and addressing

[14:12] those outcomes along the way.

[14:15] You all have the handout in front of you.

[14:19] Now, we are going to go into an example using the MSU ex board

[14:26] member position.

[14:30] In March of this year, the Bozeman City Commission

[14:33] adopted a resolution establishing MSU students

[14:36] as ex officio members of different boards including

[14:40] the Community Development Board, economic vitality

[14:44] sustainability, transportation, urban parks and forestry boards

[14:48] as non-voting members we will use that as an example

[14:50] and try to step through that using the tool

[14:52] that you have in front of you.

[14:54] Great.

[14:55] So I'm going to encourage you all

[15:00] to think through this with me with each of these questions.

[15:05] And I'm doing this because my intent

[15:08] is to also walk through staff an example with this handout

[15:15] and see if this tool is helpful in their decision

[15:17] making processes.

[15:19] The first question is, what is the policy, program or budget

[15:24] decision under consideration and what are the broad desired

[15:28] outcomes?

[15:29] Anybody want to share how they would state this?

[15:46] >> I would assume that their reasoning for a desired outcome

[15:48] would be that you have a succession plan for board

[15:51] members so that you have additional folks you can tap

[15:55] into.

[15:55] In my mind are we supposed to answer that?

[16:00] What is it that we are supposed to do?

[16:01] Am I on the right track?

[16:05] >> Yeah you're on the right track.

[16:07] Why do we have the ex officio board member MSU students

[16:12] (Indiscernible) the policy?

[16:17] >> I guess, increasing representation from students

[16:22] in Bozeman. (Indiscernible) hear what they think,

[16:27] given that they make up such a large share of the citizens.

[16:31] >> Yes.

[16:32] Good.

[16:32] This is how I framed it.

[16:35] For all of those are correct answers.

[16:37] College student voices in Bozeman

[16:41] are represented through the ex officio board member position.

[16:45] That's the policy proposal.

[16:47] Next, data.

[16:48] What data is available and what does it tell us?

[16:51] Who currently has access and is well served?

[16:54] Who does not and why?

[16:57] Anything off of the top of your heads

[16:59] could be helpful in thinking through this.

[17:00] I know this might be tough.

[17:03] >> We have the knowledge and experience of past commenters

[17:07] and board members of city boards,

[17:09] knowing a little bit about the composition of what kind

[17:13] of people come up and give comments.

[17:16] So we can say, if we dug into it,

[17:19] we could figure out how frequently MSU students have

[17:23] participated in either part of that.

[17:26] >> Yes, sure.

[17:29] >> We could maybe look through our past work plans and get

[17:34] an idea of how often the topics we address do impact

[17:37] the university or students living in the community.

[17:41] >> Yes, that is helpful data -- on who is being impacted

[17:45] by different policies.

[17:53] Okay, here are some data points that I wrote about.

[17:59] Generally, the city of Bozeman's population is about 5000,

[18:02] maybe closer to 60,000.

[18:05] MSU student enrollment is approximately 17,000.

[18:08] That means students make up about 34% of Bozeman.

[18:12] And MSU students historically have not

[18:15] been represented in Bozeman City Commission.

[18:17] 15% of MSU enrolled students identify

[18:20] as some underrepresented race or ethnicity.

[18:22] The average student at MSU is about 20 years old.

[18:27] And young people aged 20 to 29 make up about of about 32%

[18:31] of Bozeman's population and have been underrepresented

[18:34] in community service and public comment input, like you said,

[18:39] Albert.

[18:39] And young people under the age of 25

[18:41] are going to be more likely to be renters and low income

[18:45] earners.

[18:46] Community engagement.

[18:48] How stakeholders have been engaged,

[18:52] what happened in the process?

[18:55] >> Can we go back a moment?

[18:57] Just to the previous slide.

[19:01] Just to understand this tool a little bit more.

[19:05] I'm just kind of getting used to it.

[19:09] I guess I'm kind of --

[19:14] I guess I'm kind of wondering, should we

[19:17] go into the sort of thing where you want to go into more detail?

[19:22] And I guess I was even thinking for the previous point,

[19:25] as a proposal, the other part of that question

[19:30] was this broad desired outcome.

[19:33] Where, I guess I'm getting a sense --

[19:38] this is pretty detailed.

[19:42] I was thinking, like, we've got the students, but what about --

[19:49] I, is there more to it?

[19:53] We want to hear the young people's voices

[19:55] but they're not students.

[19:57] In the back of my head, I'm trying to go to that question

[20:00] that we come to later.

[20:01] I guess I'm thinking forward about this type of thing.

[20:07] It's moving quickly for me.

[20:11] That's what I'm saying.

[20:13] >> That is a great point.

[20:14] And I think it's important to look at all of the data,

[20:18] as much data as you can.

[20:20] But also, see where there are gaps in that type of data.

[20:23] There are a lot of young people aged 20 to 29

[20:26] who are not enrolled at MSU that might be missing out by not

[20:30] having that representation.

[20:32] And that is a good point to think about.

[20:35] It will help us to stuff out -- suss out where those gaps

[20:43] in what we're doing in some of our policies and decision making

[20:46] by using this type of tool.

[20:48] Any other thoughts?

[20:57] >> For example, when I read these, I'm thinking to myself,

[21:00] what issues are the students most concerned with

[21:02] in our community?

[21:03] And I realize that students doesn't

[21:06] capture everyone in their age range you just described.

[21:08] The sake of discussion, that's what I'm talking about.

[21:12] Does the university survey the students in a way that --

[21:16] where the results (Indiscernible) get any

[21:20] information out of those results on city-related services?

[21:23] That might be where those students might be impacted.

[21:28] We can't solve all these problems

[21:30] but the thing that comes to mind, I hear about parking.

[21:34] I hear about housing.

[21:35] Those are the two primaries that come to mind.

[21:40] The question is, when you talk about data,

[21:43] can we get any info out of the surveys

[21:45] at the university might already be putting out that we

[21:49] just maybe aren't aware of?

[21:51] That was my comment.

[21:54] >> I know that the registrar's office does a survey of incoming

[21:58] students every year and asks them specifically what issues

[22:02] are important to them.

[22:03] So that could be important data for us

[22:06] to have when we think about this.

[22:13] >> This may be just a distinction to be made,

[22:15] I see this as context data.

[22:18] Whereas later on in the sequence of analysis and implementation,

[22:24] maybe there's a role for performance data

[22:26] as well to practice the recursive editing

[22:29] of the plan in real time.

[22:32] But yeah, there's almost two different types

[22:35] of data that are helped without this life cycle.

[22:40] And maybe that's a distinction worth making

[22:42] in that second step.

[22:45] >> Yeah, I think what you're saying is spot on.

[22:47] Especially down the line when you think about accountability,

[22:50] and are we actually meeting the goals that we

[22:53] want and are intending to meet?

[22:57] The next is community engagement.

[23:00] How have stakeholders been engaged?

[23:03] Whose voices are missing from the conversation

[23:05] and how can we gain their perspective?

[23:08] I don't have all the details of how this came about,

[23:12] but I have a couple of things that I've written down.

[23:15] But if you are in a situation and you came up

[23:18] with the MSU ex officio board position, how would

[23:22] you engage stakeholders?

[23:42] >> (Indiscernible)

[23:43] >> (Laughs)

[23:45] >> I guess it all depends on who is passing this decision, right?

[23:48] In this case, I would assume that the MSU students

[23:54] and the people who had a say in whether this

[24:00] MSU ex officio role should be part of the board plan.

[24:06] I guess it all depends on what's been passed

[24:10] and what's in front of us.

[24:13] In this case, it would be us if it comes in front of us.

[24:18] And then whoever the other side is for MSU.

[24:24] >> For sure.

[24:26] >> Since this is community engagement for college students,

[24:30] and they are a huge stakeholder, so I would begin their.

[24:35] I would talk to members of student government.

[24:38] I would talk to members of community groups

[24:42] that represent marginalized groups to see

[24:45] what they are thinking.

[24:47] I would talk to professors that are knowledgeable in areas

[24:52] that we represent.

[24:55] And obviously, I would talk with other organizations that maybe

[25:02] help with highlighting voices of young people,

[25:04] just to see what they are doing and how they are doing it.

[25:08] So that's what I would do.

[25:12] Anyone else have any thoughts on how

[25:16] you could engage stakeholders?

[25:22] yes.

[25:25] >> Is part of the process what we're doing now is thinking

[25:28] about slight changes to the framework?

[25:32] Because I guess I'm intrigued by the first,

[25:37] who are the stakeholders?

[25:39] Almost before, how have the stakeholders been engaged?

[25:43] And this specific policy, maybe it's

[25:46] very broad because the stakeholders are essentially

[25:48] everyone, because this is going to be a city wide kind of thing.

[25:52] But for my thinking was, who are the stakeholders?

[25:56] And recognizing that.

[25:58] Then, how have stakeholders been engaged?

[26:00] And then -- that's just a thought I had on reading these

[26:05] questions.

[26:05] I don't know if that's useful or not.

[26:08] >> I was thinking the same thing.

[26:10] But I would almost move the analysis step

[26:12] in front of the community engagement step.

[26:16] Because to me, the analysis part where

[26:18] we are thinking about who's being differentially impacted

[26:21] is really useful for identifying some of the stakeholders

[26:24] and who they are.

[26:26] For example, if there's something that we are not really

[26:29] saying that women or men are going

[26:31] to be differentially impacted.

[26:32] I'm not too worried about the gender balance of who's

[26:35] been engaged in this process.

[26:38] But if we've already said, we think

[26:40] this is going to be having a big impact on women in particular,

[26:43] then I would say, do we have a plan for how we're

[26:46] going to make sure that we are engaging both men and women

[26:50] in this particular process?

[26:54] >> I think it makes sense to ask the question of, who are

[26:58] the stakeholders, before beginning engagement.

[27:05] So some ways that the public is engaged.

[27:10] Communication with staff and MSU students

[27:12] including multiple organizations across campus.

[27:16] And public comments solicited during City Commission meetings

[27:19] from community members with different perspectives

[27:22] on the issue.

[27:26] >> I'll just note, one stakeholder we didn't identify.

[27:30] And I think (Indiscernible) the advisory board

[27:36] chairs (Indiscernible) to talk about getting extra or different

[27:40] representation on the board.

[27:43] >> I will say that this is also something to think through all

[27:47] of these things.

[27:49] So you're not actually doing the community engagement yet.

[27:52] You're just thinking through all of these steps

[27:54] before you consider your proposal, even.

[27:58] So that way you've thought about all of these things

[28:00] before you've proposed.

[28:02] We're going to have this board member position.

[28:06] I've already thought about who should engage,

[28:09] what that analysis looks like, what engagement looks like,

[28:13] how we can implement it -- before even saying we're doing

[28:17] a thing.

[28:18] That way, hopefully, you'll mitigate

[28:21] some unintended consequence and leaving people out.

[28:24] So this is kind of a tool to use before you even

[28:26] make this decision.

[28:28] The next question kind of asks us

[28:32] about the analysis and strategy.

[28:35] Who will benefit from the MSU ex board member position proposal?

[28:39] And who will be burdened by the proposal?

[28:45] Any thoughts on this?

[28:50] >> This actually might be a good spot to add in age groups

[28:54] specifically as something to start for consideration.

[28:58] Youth, children or families of children, and the elderly. --

[29:06] families with children and the elderly.

[29:08] But obviously, in this case, one of the groups

[29:11] that will benefit from the proposal

[29:13] will be MSU students in particular,

[29:15] and the youth of the population, and could perhaps

[29:19] give a stronger voice to the renter population as well.

[29:30] >> Any other thoughts?

[29:32] >> I believe students come in all kinds of different colors

[29:35] and genders, and economic status, and all of that.

[29:40] So a lot of what you have in here,

[29:43] when it comes to consideration, it's

[29:46] (Indiscernible) the example that you gave us with the toothbrush.

[29:49] Where, if you help one, you help many.

[29:53] And this may be the case on that one as well.

[30:07] >> I think it's super useful to recognize all these different

[30:09] groups here.

[30:10] I was also wondering, I know that's helpful

[30:13] starting considerations as a useful toolkit.

[30:17] But picking up on what Daisy was saying, for city-level policies,

[30:26] I think you could (Indiscernible) geographic

[30:31] neighborhoods and more city-level analyzes

[30:33] and types of things in addition to these important things.

[30:38] But just recognizing what Bozeman looks like.

[30:41] We've got southwest, Northwest, and that type of thing.

[30:46] More Bozeman-specific categories,

[30:49] I guess could be useful to include

[30:51] as a starting consideration.

[30:54] Which is kind of like what was being talked

[30:56] about with the renters and owners and that type of thing,

[31:00] making that distinction.

[31:03] >>, yes, for sure.

[31:06] Some of the things that I pointed out

[31:08] when I was doing this.

[31:10] MSU students make up all of the demographics listed to the left.

[31:14] Daisy, (Indiscernible).

[31:16] And students in the broader community

[31:18] will benefit from learning opportunity and representation.

[31:20] The potential for increased student

[31:22] engagement in the local government.

[31:23] Students could be burdened by additional responsibility

[31:26] and need to represent their peers.

[31:29] Even though we're representing students,

[31:31] what young people who are not in college may be left out of this.

[31:36] And that is an important consideration.

[31:39] And then city commissioners, board members,

[31:41] and city staff will be responsible for ensuring that

[31:44] our representatives are prepared and can provide input within

[31:47] the board's.

[31:47] And those are all important to consider

[31:49] when thinking about this.

[31:52] Next, what is the plan for implementation?

[31:55] Again, I don't really know what the plan is for implementation,

[32:00] but what do you think the plan could be?

[32:02] Making sure that the timeline, communications, and the process

[32:07] address the needs of a variety of these groups

[32:09] that we talked about.

[32:25] >> Can you just repeat the question that you're asking?

[32:28] (Laughs).

[32:29] >> So, thinking about the MSU ex officio board member position,

[32:34] how would you make a plan to implement that,

[32:38] ensuring that the timeline for, the communications,

[32:41] in the process address the needs of a --

[32:45] and the process addresses the needs of a variety of people.

[32:52] >> Anybody want to share on implementation?

[32:54] How are you going to implement it?

[32:58] >> I'm guessing what the City Commission might have been

[33:00] thinking about finding a target group (Indiscernible) students

[33:07] union or students association.

[33:08] Thinking, we will reach out to this group

[33:11] and we'll use them as leverage and lay out a timeline.

[33:14] But I'm just guessing what the city commissioners

[33:17] might have been thinking.

[33:20] >> Yeah, I don't know either.

[33:22] But this is just an example to think through how you would do

[33:24] something like this as some -- >> As someone who attended

[33:29] the discussion about it, I think the plan proposed at ASMSU will

[33:37] be represented -- will recruit students to start in the fall.

[33:41] And it will be a one year term and it

[33:43] will make it a little bit more easier to students

[33:45] who may not have to commit to a two year

[33:47] like most board members.

[33:49] And they are responsible for recruiting and interviewing

[33:52] and then proposing to the commission to approve.

[33:57] >> Some sample things that I said to think about

[33:59] for the timeline communications,, -- timeline,

[34:09] communication and process is ensuring that MSU students

[34:13] on campus have adequate notice and opportunity to be appointed

[34:18] to various boards with outreach from MSU to various student

[34:22] groups and departments across campus.

[34:25] Assigning current board students to provide training for newly

[34:30] selected MSU student Board members to make sure that

[34:32] the training meetings -- meets the needs of the busy students

[34:35] and their schedules.

[34:36] And the student board member will be given opportunity

[34:39] to regularly attend meetings in between meetings

[34:41] that they can meet with staff and can

[34:42] be successful in their role and prepared.

[34:44] Those are some of the thoughts on how

[34:46] to roll it out so that it meets the needs of the students.

[34:48] And then come accountability and communication.

[34:51] How would you ensure accountability

[34:53] to meeting the proposal goals?

[34:55] How will results be evaluated?

[34:58] And making sure that plans include checkpoints for review,

[35:03] reporting and addressing outcomes.

[35:05] Any thoughts on that?

[35:15] >> I'm assuming results be evaluated by having an actual

[35:17] role where you see a person sitting in front of you,

[35:20] and they are an MSU ex officio.

[35:23] And you have a pipeline of upcoming students

[35:26] that are coming for the role once the term ends.

[35:30] And then, plenty of other candidates

[35:33] to choose from to be able to make a good selection.

[35:39] And then, accountability, I would assume that as long as --

[35:45] you had mentioned that MSU takes accountability for selecting

[35:49] and making a proposal for that candidate.

[35:53] Then, the accountability is truly just on the MSU body.

[36:00] And just holding accountable -- hold them accountable based

[36:04] on timelines, similar to any other role.

[36:07] Unless I'm oversimplifying.

[36:12] >> I think it all goes back to the why.

[36:14] Why do we want to do this?

[36:16] Why do we need representation?

[36:18] And that will kind of help answer these questions.

[36:22] I'm thinking for how results will be evaluated.

[36:27] You could also implement self-surveys after someone has

[36:31] finished their term to just give their opinions on how their time

[36:37] was used -- if they thought it was valuable,

[36:41] what they got out of being a member.

[36:42] But again, I think that the city always

[36:45] has to go back to the why.

[36:47] Why do we want their representation?

[36:50] And then once you have that, the checkpoints and the reviewing

[36:53] becomes a lot easier.

[36:57] So that's where I would start, is to always ask the why

[37:01] and then follow up with the members.

[37:08] >> I think that is a good point to always come back to.

[37:10] Some things that I said as an example -- accountability,

[37:15] regular evaluation of the position with input from

[37:18] the boards and MSU students on any changes that they would

[37:20] make.

[37:21] Regularly updated changing for board members.

[37:23] Annual review of the position by city commissioners

[37:26] to ensure the role is in alignment

[37:28] with meeting the stated goals.

[37:30] And then regular review of student representation

[37:32] and attempts to continue to gain different perspectives.

[37:35] So that is what I have for you.

[37:39] I would appreciate any input that you have.

[37:42] Did we hit the mark on what should be included in this tool?

[37:46] Was there anything that was confusing or unclear

[37:49] about how to use the decision-making tool?

[37:54] And how would you recommend we incorporate this

[37:56] into our city operations?

[38:06] >> One thing that I think might be useful would be to give a few

[38:08] shoulds for each of these items in terms of ,

[38:15] when should I feel that I've reviewed the data adequately?

[38:20] What should have -- what sort of criteria do you want me to hit

[38:26] before I give this plan a thumbs up and start moving forward?

[38:30] And of course, one of the challenges

[38:33] here is you're talking about such a wide range

[38:35] of different decisions.

[38:36] It's hard to have a consistent (Indiscernible),

[38:42] but for something like community engagement, you might say,

[38:44] you should have plans to engage most

[38:46] of the groups you've identified as likely to be impacted

[38:50] by this policy.

[38:53] So, just a little bit of should to it.

[38:57] >> I like that.

[38:58] Maybe some more specificity on when to use this,

[39:02] and what is the absolute must haves for this.

[39:05] I will say that the (Indiscernible) is already

[39:10] thinking about how to incorporate this

[39:11] into all of our community engagement processes

[39:14] so that leaders think about this during the engagement process

[39:17] in particular.

[39:25] >> Yeah, to piggyback on what Kelsey said earlier,

[39:27] although I understand your thinking of this as one document

[39:32] where you're thinking about things all together.

[39:34] I do think possibly rephrasing some

[39:37] of the order of these questions could be helpful.

[39:40] And I have a few other things, but I

[39:44] guess the main first thing that I would hit

[39:48] is potentially separating the goal as the very first thing.

[39:51] Again separating that from that proposal.

[39:54] Like, the very first question is,

[39:57] what is the board's desired outcome --

[40:02] broad desired outcome?

[40:04] And what is the proposal?

[40:06] It's always come back to the why.

[40:08] As always, you have that at the very top of everything

[40:11] as what you are trying to do, as its own category.

[40:14] And I think it would be helpful --

[40:17] and going through this was super useful.

[40:18] When I did this when I was reading through the agenda,

[40:23] a concrete example makes it so much clearer what's happening.

[40:29] And to Kelsey's point about the stakeholders getting

[40:33] recognized earlier, but also then be

[40:37] very useful for how to think about some of these questions.

[40:41] That's my take after a few moments.

[40:44] I'm sure there might be cons to what I'm suggesting,

[40:47] but that's kind of my initial thoughts.

[40:52] >> Do you think there is value to actually pushing the goal

[40:55] after the data?

[40:57] Like, look at the data and then see what the goals should be.

[41:01] And almost have the goal be reflective of that.

[41:04] >> Yes, I guess in some sense you're saying,

[41:07] what is the problem , as the first question.

[41:13] And making sure to look at the data,

[41:14] and make sure this is (Indiscernible)?

[41:18] Or you're saying, we don't have any MSU engagement.

[41:21] We should make sure because maybe MSU students were coming

[41:24] to present and we just didn't even realize

[41:27] and so we anecdotally thought they were having opinions.

[41:31] I guess that's what you're getting >> Sort of.

[41:38] I'm thinking of telescoping our way

[41:39] from the proposal to the goal.

[41:42] The proposal is, here's the recognition of a potential gap.

[41:46] But then the data tells you the specifics about might --

[41:53] about a gap that might exist.

[41:55] And then it gives you some clues on what outcomes could actually

[41:57] plug the gaps and drive you towards your goal definition.

[42:10] >> For me, just in regards to a tool,

[42:11] I would want something that's really useful -- usable,

[42:14] that straightforward, that lends itself to many different areas.

[42:18] This was really hard, to be honest.

[42:21] But once we got into it and we had you explain,

[42:24] it did get a little bit easier.

[42:28] But I want to know how other people felt using the tools.

[42:33] We are coming in completely green and fresh,

[42:37] but maybe if they had a little bit more time with this tool

[42:39] it would feel a lot familiar and would work.

[42:43] So that's what I would say.

[42:45] Is it usable?

[42:46] Is it straightforward?.

[42:50] That's my advice.

[42:53] >> I guess I'm curious, do you see the city Commission using

[42:57] this before they direct staff to work on something?

[43:01] Or does the City Commission make the decision and then staff

[43:05] uses it when they're crafting an engagement plan

[43:08] or figuring out how to do a public survey or something?

[43:13] >> My hope is that this tool is used in many steps along

[43:16] the process.

[43:17] But for a city commission to actually use the tool

[43:20] before they even think of their idea or make a proposal,

[43:24] go through the tool, look at the data,

[43:27] and then present something for the community.

[43:31] And then same with internal leadership.

[43:33] Let's say they have a directive from the commission,

[43:36] but they need advice on how to do it.

[43:39] Think through these items before even beginning that, before

[43:42] beginning an engagement process, just

[43:44] making sure to look at all of the school items first.

[43:50] >> I just wanted to add to this third question which I believe

[43:54] gets at that two.

[43:57] We want to hear from-- gets at that too.

[44:06] We want to hear from you all on what

[44:08] you think is the best time to use this tool for the city

[44:12] and provide feedback on that.

[44:16] >> I myself was also confused.

[44:18] I think what I struggle with the most is the applicability.

[44:24] When in time and who can use this?

[44:29] And if this is a tool, what kind of decision?

[44:35] Is it every single decision?

[44:38] I just struggled with finding focus more than anything.

[44:43] And then also, when you roll out a tool, you have to think about,

[44:49] is this just a check the box item?

[44:51] Is this a template?

[44:53] A guide?

[44:54] Will it be enforced?

[44:57] Will it just be a nice thing to have?

[45:03] Those things are what I'm thinking about when

[45:06] it comes to implementation.

[45:07] It was a bit difficult to follow, and I think a lot of it

[45:11] is because I didn't have enough context.

[45:13] In my mind, I was thinking this decision (Indiscernible) for us.

[45:20] So if something comes to us, and we are like,

[45:22] are we asking the right question?

[45:24] In my mind, I kept thinking, this would be good for us

[45:27] so that we can address whether we have enough data,

[45:29] whether we have heard from everyone.

[45:31] But at the same time, sometimes we have little to no time

[45:34] to really think about and ask other people

[45:36] outside of this group what their thoughts are

[45:38] on this or the other.

[45:40] And so it does require a little bit more preparation.

[45:43] I do not know how it is that this

[45:47] can go and be applied to other areas of the city Commission.

[45:53] But I would say for anything, we could probably

[45:59] benefit from a little simplification and a little bit

[46:03] more focus on what decisions are meant to be rolling down

[46:09] with this tool.

[46:12] And certainly not everything requires

[46:14] all seven different aspects of this, right?

[46:19] There are things where you may not even have data.

[46:22] And if you don't have data, should you have a proposal?

[46:25] If you don't feel any of these questions,

[46:28] does that mean that you don't have a problem?

[46:30] And therefore, we don't get to work on it,

[46:34] and you can't be heard.

[46:35] It's just those things.

[46:37] And I don't know if I'm going in circles,

[46:39] but I think you need some refinement.

[46:41] And I still don't know what stage

[46:44] of the process this should be.

[46:47] Whether, should this be at the beginning?

[46:49] Or should this be part of our group

[46:51] so that we can evaluate things as we go along

[46:53] when a proposal does come to a body of approvers.

[47:06] >> As far as timing goes, personally,

[47:08] I see this as being useful at a couple of stages.

[47:10] One of them is when we have either a data or a policy idea,

[47:17] or a big goal, and we're trying to figure out,

[47:23] what kind of things do we want to consider?

[47:25] What possible method do we want to use

[47:27] while we're implementing it?

[47:29] So it's in the initial drafting stage of some kind of proposal.

[47:34] And I'd also maybe think it could be useful to run through,

[47:38] we've gone through a couple of iterations

[47:40] of what seems feasible, we've gathered some more data.

[47:44] Before we sign off and make this thing really happen,

[47:48] let's use this as a second last check --

[47:53] as a last checklist as we're bumping things off and seeing

[47:57] if we've lost anything in the process or changed anything.

[48:01] I don't want to make it at too many stages

[48:05] because I think the more times people need to fill it out,

[48:07] the more likely it is to turn into a box checking exercise

[48:10] that people don't think about enough.

[48:12] And so trying to identify talking to the commission,

[48:17] maybe talking to us about, here's

[48:20] a key place in a proposal's life cycle

[48:24] where we want to go through this tool and make that standard.

[48:28] And hopefully the questions will lead themselves

[48:32] through other part of the process as well.

[48:36] It risks unnecessarily slowing things down as well

[48:40] if we try making it in at too many points.

[48:42] I also wonder if you might be able to make a flowchart version

[48:48] of this to help people see the connections between

[48:52] the different questions , and it might be interesting to play

[48:59] around with.

[49:07] >> For me in my mind, I would split this into two parts.

[49:09] Like, the proposal and the why.

[49:12] I think that's something that the city commission decides

[49:14] when they set their priorities and they pass a resolution.

[49:20] They say, whereas because of this data,

[49:24] whereas because of this problem.

[49:26] They might use that whenever they're passing a resolution.

[49:30] The city commission is in charge of the piece of the proposal

[49:34] and the data that seems relevant to define the problem.

[49:36] That seems beyond our pay grade, I would say.

[49:40] But maybe the part that we could help with (Indiscernible) more

[49:46] tool-based is when you guys put the public engagement plan

[49:48] for either you're talking about the urban forest outreach plan

[49:51] or how it's going to reach people.

[49:53] You could come in front of the board and say,

[49:55] we've came up with these stakeholders.

[49:58] Who are we missing?

[50:00] And given these stakeholders, what

[50:02] are the best ways to reach them?

[50:04] That might be a way that depending on the boards

[50:06] expertise, they could weigh on the most effective ways of who's

[50:11] being impacted, what would be the best ways

[50:13] to engage those groups?

[50:16] Maybe through community engagement and strategies --

[50:20] the last four pieces might be helpful to go in front

[50:24] of the relevant board to get feedback before the public

[50:28] outreach kicks off on the relevant project.

[50:31] At

[50:32] >> I'm just curious about the data component and how we are

[50:36] accessing data.

[50:37] This has been a huge issue in the last five years,

[50:42] particularly with belonging in Bozeman

[50:44] and trying to get data for a very small population of people.

[50:48] And considering that it's a major vital part of this tool,

[50:52] I'm interested in knowing, how are we gathering that data?

[50:57] Who's responsible for that?

[50:59] And when the data is very small, how

[51:01] are we making sure that we protect people's anonymity so

[51:05] that they will feel like they can actually

[51:09] answer the question without people knowing, that was Daniel.

[51:14] You know?

[51:15] Those are some things that I always

[51:17] think about with the data.

[51:19] Because we are in a unique situation in Bozeman.

[51:22] We don't have large populations of marginalized groups.

[51:26] And the people that are part of those communities,

[51:28] I think we need to be respectful of their anonymity

[51:31] when we ask questions.

[51:33] I'm curious to note, maybe you could speak to that,

[51:37] how are we finding >> First of all, this discussion is helpful

[51:48] and I really appreciate this tool.

[51:50] It is a question of how do we make decisions as a community

[51:52] and as a commission?

[51:55] What I like about this is that it brings a certain amount

[51:59] of structure to that.

[52:01] Or it could bring some structure.

[52:05] I think the data right now, how we

[52:09] get the data is there's a variety of ways.

[52:12] We have city staff.

[52:14] We have double Dutch all of your commissions have been elected

[52:19] and knocking on doors. -- all of your commissions have been

[52:23] elected and have been knocking on doors.

[52:24] We bring different things to the table in a different sense

[52:27] of what the community is.

[52:29] We hear different things from constituents via public comment.

[52:32] So how we get data is not right now terribly structured.

[52:38] But I think having a tool like this,

[52:41] and having that muscle memory of the City commission

[52:45] could get into this.

[52:48] And we are very upfront about where we see this

[52:52] and where the data comes from as we make decisions.

[52:56] What's the problem?

[52:57] What's the why?

[52:58] These are great questions to be thinking

[53:00] about as your commission.

[53:09] >> You can't do this tool if you don't have the data.

[53:11] We can't utilize this tool if we do not have the data.

[53:14] That is a component that you really need to lean into.

[53:17] And I understand the limitations of that, and the money involved.

[53:22] And the resources that are involved.

[53:23] And everyone works so incredibly hard.

[53:26] But I want to make sure that this tool is useful

[53:30] and that it is actually going to do what it's supposed to do.

[53:35] And I know I'm speaking frankly, but we

[53:39] need to make sure that that is a component that

[53:43] is 100% addressed.

[53:45] And I would do that before moving forward with this tool.

[53:50] >> I will say, just regarding the data privacy piece,

[53:55] in all of our dashboards, we do make sure if there's a certain

[53:59] number that seems too small, then we will either group some

[54:03] groups together or just make a disclaimer at the bottom,

[54:08] there was less than x number, so we decided not to share this

[54:12] particular data set.

[54:14] >> Thank you.

[54:16] >> About the data, right?

[54:19] So I sat on the school board.

[54:23] The school board or the school district

[54:25] grapples with this all the time.

[54:27] And they have small groups of data.

[54:30] And they are really careful about protecting anonymity

[54:35] and protecting confidential information.

[54:38] But yet, they do make decisions.

[54:41] And they are able to use that data to drive policies.

[54:46] So some of it may be, as policy makers in the public,

[54:50] we don't necessarily see that public.

[54:53] But it is kind of kept in confidence with staff.

[54:56] And we have to rely on staff to be that extra filter.

[55:00] But there are definite ways to get to data from small sample

[55:08] sizes.

[55:09] Five of you on here already know how to do that, right?

[55:14] So I think we can get to that.

[55:18] And we have partners in the community

[55:21] who are already doing that.

[55:25] >> All right.

[55:26] This hurts my heart to say a little bit and --

[55:33] bit as an economist.

[55:36] But if you get to the data step and you

[55:38] realize you have garbage data for the most part,

[55:40] that doesn't necessarily mean you have

[55:41] to throw away the whole tool.

[55:43] And I think that's something that you can make clear

[55:45] of in the should section.

[55:47] If you just have a collection of anecdotes that say something

[55:51] seems to be really a problem, but nobody

[55:54] has collected any statistics that can tell us something

[55:56] one way or another.

[55:58] The fact that we don't have that information

[56:00] is something that we should be thinking about

[56:02] as we are moving forward with the plan.

[56:05] And in particular, in the feedback step we might say,

[56:09] okay, I don't actually know whether MSU students feel

[56:13] underrepresented or not.

[56:14] For example, if we didn't have any data on that.

[56:18] So maybe as we start thinking about how

[56:19] we're going to do the community engagement step,

[56:21] maybe a really important part of that

[56:23] is going to be to start by talking

[56:25] with MSU students and student groups

[56:27] about whether they feel underrepresented or not.

[56:30] A lack of data doesn't need to mean,

[56:33] full stop, we can't do anything, not moving forward.

[56:36] It just maybe shows some gaps in some places where

[56:40] we want to be a little humble and continue

[56:43] to get feedback in as we figure out

[56:46] what approach we want to take to the possible problem.

[57:03] I would say come on to add on to that,

[57:07] that is with any of the questions. -- >> I would say,

[57:12] to add on to that, that is with any of the questions.

[57:16] I think the subjective interpretation,

[57:17] depending on who's using the tool,

[57:20] I think what I was suggesting about the shoulds

[57:23] to help clarify each item.

[57:25] Just by passing because there's not enough data,

[57:28] or what about the rest of the other questions?

[57:31] Just reducing some subjectivity would help clarify.

[57:37] >> I'll just say one thing, I'm very happy that limited English

[57:41] proficiency is on here.

[57:42] As someone who used to work with that population a lot,

[57:45] having everything in plain English

[57:47] is one of the things that benefits

[57:49] more than just people who speak English

[57:51] as a second or third language.

[57:53] So I'd be happy if that could be something that's incorporated

[57:56] in the city outreach stuff.

[57:58] It's simplifying (Indiscernible) plain as possible.

[58:03] I think that would be something good to practice.

[58:13] >> Any other thoughts?

[58:15] Well, I appreciate all of your input and your thoughts

[58:19] into this tool.

[58:20] And it's going to be helpful.

[58:21] Go ahead.

[58:23] >> I had one more which is just piggybacking what's already been

[58:28] said.

[58:28] In some sense, sometimes less is more in some ways.

[58:37] And sometimes, I guess I'm just imagining, working with this,

[58:45] maybe you might have one column which is suggested questions,

[58:51] rather than listing them all in the main heading.

[58:54] So some of them could be relevant and some of them won't.

[59:00] And related to that, is some of the categories,

[59:03] I felt we asked too many questions under one heading.

[59:07] That was another thought I had in my mind.

[59:12] I think that was a very interesting exercise for me.

[59:16] I think it's very, very useful.

[59:22] And I think this is something that could become

[59:24] very >> I was thinking a table.

[59:29] Like a matrix.

[59:30] I'm going to use banking jargon, and I apologize about that.

[59:38] It's very complex sometimes.

[59:40] And we have to decide whether to get a loan

[59:43] or not to get a loan, similar to a decision.

[59:46] And when you have to translate complex ideas,

[59:49] typically tables help a lot -- and reduce wording.

[59:55] As Andrew mentioned, make it simple.

[1:00:00] And then, no more than one page.

[1:00:03] Because if you have multiple pages

[1:00:04] with paragraphs of instructions, you may lose the reader.

[1:00:08] It's just things like that.

[1:00:11] The content is still good.

[1:00:13] It's just refinement (Indiscernible)

[1:00:17] a little bit of help.

[1:00:20] >> Okay.

[1:00:20] Thank you.

[1:00:21] >> Thank you so much for coming tonight and sharing the work

[1:00:24] that you have done.

[1:00:25] We really appreciate it.

[1:00:27] And I hope that it's been helpful in some way.

[1:00:29] And if it hasn't, I'll make it up to you.

[1:00:33] I promise.

[1:00:35] >> Thank you, again.

[1:00:38] >> All right.

[1:00:39] I am going to take some public comments because this

[1:00:42] is such a fruitful discussion.

[1:00:43] I want to make sure that we give folks at home an opportunity

[1:00:48] to give public comment.

[1:00:49] I'm just going to remind people to please state your name,

[1:00:53] state of your resident of a city, please state if you're --

[1:00:59] please state if you're a resident of the city,

[1:01:01] please state if you're a property owner.

[1:01:03] Again please, only speak for three minutes.

[1:01:05] Do we have anyone who would like to give a public comment that

[1:01:09] is currently online?

[1:01:11] >> There are two members of the public online,

[1:01:13] but neither has their hand raised for public comment.

[1:01:16] >> Okay.

[1:01:17] Thank you very much.

[1:01:19] Before we move for adjournment, is there anything

[1:01:23] that we need to know for the good of the order, Brett,

[1:01:27] that you would like us to consider for our next meetings?

[1:01:33] >> Thank you for asking the question.

[1:01:35] I would like the board to know that the next meeting

[1:01:38] topic, if I'm not mistaken, is going to revolve around the C

[1:01:42] Bozeman Creek plan.

[1:01:43] I believe John Henderson will be here.

[1:01:47] Maybe some of the Bozeman Creek group

[1:01:49] that's been working with him as well.

[1:01:51] That'll be the topic for next month's agenda.

[1:01:55] >> Wonderful.

[1:01:56] And one other thing, can you just

[1:01:59] remind everyone where their term ends

[1:02:01] and how to reapply if they would like to reapply

[1:02:04] for Economic Vitality Board.

[1:02:07] >> Yes, thank you for that.

[1:02:09] I don't have the terms in front of me

[1:02:11] but I will email that out to everyone tomorrow.

[1:02:14] And I can't say that the application process --

[1:02:18] I'll include the link in the email.

[1:02:20] That way you have it right in front of you.

[1:02:23] >> Wonderful.

[1:02:23] Thank you so much, Brett, for all that you do.

[1:02:27] And thank you, Commissioner, for being here.

[1:02:30] I hope that --

[1:02:31] I hope I didn't come a little too much for the data.

[1:02:34] But I just strongly believe in that,

[1:02:37] so strongly that we find a way to work around that,

[1:02:40] to get that data.

[1:02:43] I don't want things to not be pursued

[1:02:45] because we don't have it.

[1:02:46] So, thank you for being here and answering.

[1:02:51] >> Certainly, I agree 100% about the data.

[1:02:54] It's helpful to inform what to pursue and not to pursue.

[1:02:58] Can I take a few minutes?

[1:02:59] I wanted to call attention to an effort that Brett is doing.

[1:03:03] The model and mentor initiative we

[1:03:06] have with the Ukrainian delegation

[1:03:08] visiting later this month.

[1:03:12] And I've got a 15 page, in exquisitely small type,

[1:03:18] an outline of goals and what the program initiatives are.

[1:03:24] How many delegates are coming?

[1:03:28] >> Eight delegates.

[1:03:30] >> Eight delegates from our Ukrainian --

[1:03:32] it's more than a sister city.

[1:03:34] It's a model and a mentor initiative.

[1:03:37] And it's really an effort to exchange ideas.

[1:03:39] They will be here for almost a week, right?

[1:03:42] >> They will be here for nine days.

[1:03:45] >> Nine days, exactly.

[1:03:47] And Brett has been working incredibly hard on this

[1:03:49] to make them feel welcome, to make them feel involved, to plug

[1:03:53] them into the community.

[1:03:54] So I think he's setting them up for success.

[1:03:56] And I just really appreciate the work

[1:03:58] that you're putting into >> Thank you, deputy mayor.

[1:04:02] I appreciate that.

[1:04:03] I'm happy to share that in more detail

[1:04:04] if you are interested in the content and in the programing.

[1:04:10] I'm happy to share that at a time that's convenient for you.

[1:04:15] >> All, I'm going to go ahead and call -- all right,

[1:04:20] I'm going to go ahead and call for adjournment.

[1:04:22] This meeting is adjourned.

[1:04:25] It is 6:59 p.m..

Economic Vitality Board

Agenda

Transcript