Butte–Silver Bow study commission reports majority support for city‑county manager; public hearing set for May 4

BUTTE–SILVER BOW, Mont. — The Butte–Silver Bow Government Study Commission on April 27 said preliminary survey results show roughly 52% support for a City‑County Manager model and scheduled a public hearing for May 4 as it moves toward finalizing charter options for the ballot.

Chairperson Brandl reported attendance counts from recent listening sessions — Melrose: 10; Northwestern Energy: 37; Ramsay: 18; Butte Brewing: 50 — and told commissioners the commission had received 456 electronic survey responses so far. "We do not have budget authority," Brandl said, emphasizing that any cost estimates are informational and that the commission must avoid misleading the public.

The finding matters because the commission is deciding which local government structure options will appear on the ballot, and how they will be described. County Attorney Matt Enrooth told the commission that fiscal notes are not legally required for Study Commission recommendations and are only required for actions that directly affect taxes or levies. Enrooth also said that "retaining existing charter language must remain an option" on the ballot and that each ballot option will need majority commission approval.

Commissioner Dennehy said the public has been unclear about the difference between a Chief Executive and a mayor, and clarified that "if the Chief Executive position is retained, there will not be a mayor." He urged presenting fiscal impacts as ranges for transparency and raised the possibility of reducing the size of the council to three, four or five members depending on the model adopted. Commissioner Casey and others warned that preparing formal fiscal notes would be inappropriate for the commission’s role.

Discussion also covered whether commissioner positions should be full‑time or part‑time. Commissioner Silk and Commissioner Casey said leaving that decision out of the charter would preserve flexibility; Chairperson Brandl and Commissioner McCormick said the workload could justify full‑time commissioners and could improve representation.

On ballot presentation and public process, Commissioners agreed on an open public comment format for the May 4 hearing and endorsed a four‑to‑five minute guideline per speaker, with ADA accommodations. "We will be graceful, kind, and respectful to each speaker," Brandl said, and recommended providing a brief single‑slide overview of the ballot items to help commenters.

The commission debated leaving the survey open until after the public hearing but voted to close the survey on May 7 to keep the project timeline. Commissioner Dennehy moved to close the survey May 7; Commissioner Shaw seconded and the motion carried unanimously.

Key deadlines set at the meeting include a target of June 15 for ballot language and a final report due July 7; County Attorney Enrooth stressed the need for clear decisions by the May 11 deliberations. The commission also noted the possibility of back‑to‑back deliberation meetings on May 11–12 if more time is required.

Votes at a glance: The commission unanimously approved the March 23, 2026 minutes (motion by Commissioner Dennehy, second by Commissioner Shaw); unanimously approved a motion to close the public survey May 7, 2026 (motion by Commissioner Dennehy, second by Commissioner Shaw); and unanimously approved adjournment at 6:40 p.m. (motion by Commissioner Shaw, second by Commissioner Silk).

The commission will hold a public hearing on May 4, 2026 at 5:30 p.m. and reconvene for deliberations on May 11 (with May 12 reserved if needed).