Local government reviews are on this summer’s primary ballots.

Montana law requires that all county and municipal governments ask voters every 10 years if they want to conduct a local government review and establish a study commission.

The review is not of those currently in office but of the structure of the existing local government.

The first review was conducted in 1974.

County Commissioners send local government review to the June ballot

Municipalities and the county had to adopt a resolution by March 11 calling for an election on the question of conducting a local government review.

Cascade County Commissioners voted unanimously during their March 5 meeting to approve a resolution calling for the question of a local government review to be placed on the June ballot.

Cascade County Commissioners approved a resolution calling for a five member study commission and funding not to exceed $100,000, should voters call for a government review.

City Commissioners approved a resolution on Feb. 6 calling for five members and a cost of up to $150,000.

The City of Belt and Town of Cascade also submitted resolutions.

The Town of Neihart did not submit a resolution, according to Terry Thompson, county election administrator.

City approves resolution calling for local government review

Belt’s resolution calls for three study commission members and a cost of up to $4,000.

The Town of Cascade’s resolution called for a three-member study commission and a cost not to exceed $17,000.

All voters in Cascade County will see the county’s local government study question on their ballot.

Voters living in the city or town limits of Great Falls, Belt or Cascade will also see that question on their ballots.

If a majority of voters are satisfied with their existing form, the process ends.

City considering resolution to call for local government review on ballot

If a majority of voters opt for a local government review, qualified electors can begin filing as candidates for the study commission.

In the City of Great Falls, candidates may not be elected members of the local government, including neighborhood council representatives, according to a city memo.

The study commission elections would be on the November ballot and present their findings and recommendations in 2026 or 2027 for consideration by the voters.

It’s been decades since the county did a local government review, Commissioner Joe Briggs told The Electric in January.

The commissioner form of government has been in place for 135 years in Cascade County.

In Cascade County, there are six other elected officers in addition to the three commissioners. Those are the sheriff, county attorney, treasurer, public administrator, clerk of district court and clerk and recorder. The system was put in place in 1889, when the original state constitution was adopted, according to historical documents. A few elected offices have been consolidated with other offices since, but the basic form of government has otherwise remained.

Local government review on June ballot

Other options for counties include the commission-executive form of government with an elected commission and one elected executive who runs daily affairs. Another option is the commission-manager form with an elected commission and a manager appointed by the commission. A commission-presiding officer form, under which commissioners appoint one of their own to serve as the county’s presiding officer, is another option.

A charter form with self-government powers and consolidating city-county government are other alternatives that could be considered.

Briggs said during the March 5 meeting that the study commission could also look at the county’s other elected positions and opt to make the sheriff a hired staff position rather than elected office, or make changes to other elected offices.

The recommendations go back before voters to consideration.

How do I find that? Tips on navigating local government

In 1994, county voters approved a review with a five-member commission.

That review committee produced a report in 1996 that recommended adopting a charter to gain self-governing powers and switch to a commissioner-manager form of government, saying the legislative and executive powers of the commission should be separated.

“The current structure of separate elective offices and a three member commission has weaknesses that do not allow it to adequately handle the increased responsibility in county government. The existing government lacks an administrative head, a person responsible for supervision of the functions and services provided by county government to see that the goals of the county are carried out as efficiently as possible. In addition, the proposed form will emphasize qualifications and experience in county government positions,” the 1996 study commission wrote in their report.

County Commission votes to strip election duties from clerk and recorder’s office

The 1996 group also recommended increasing the commission from three to five members to provide stronger representation and a countywide perspective.

Under the commission-manager form, the 1996 group recommended that the chief administrative officer be hired to control the hiring and firing of staff, direct and supervise all departments, prepare the budget and manage the county’s business affairs.

Voters, who asked for the study, rejected those proposed changes by a vote of 19,642 to 12,886.

In a late December letter to E-City Beat, a local right leaning blog, County Commissioner Rae Grulkowski wrote that the county should begin conversations toward restructuring the office to include a chief administrative officer.

She said the current structure has no mechanism to prevent the commission from getting stuck in politics.

County Commission approves change to chairmanship selection; internal tension highlighted

Grulkowski wrote that the position would be funded by current vacancy savings in the commission office and other “staffing inefficiencies” and “does not take authority away from commissioners.”

Briggs told The Electric in January that the county could create a chief administrative office within their existing structure, but “it would be at a large additional cost since we do not have the authority to reduce the commissioners to a partial salary, which often goes along with the transfer of operational authority to a non-elected CAO.”

Under Cascade County’s current structure, state law allows commissioners to “appoint one or more administrative assistants to assist them in the supervision and operation of the local government.”

He said that only a change in government such as going to a commission-manager or to an elected chief executive form by a public vote can both transfer authority and offset costs by changing the commissioners role to part-time.

Some counties, including Flathead, Missoula, Gallatin, and Lewis and Clark have retained both full-time commissioners and a CAO, but Briggs said those counties were in a different financial position than Cascade County.

Briggs said that if voters authorize the review on the June ballot, those are among the options the study commission could consider.

During the Jan. 2 City Commission work session, City Manager Greg Doyon said it’s “not an inexpensive process.”

Doyon said that depending on the number of study commission members, the city likely won’t have space to support their meetings so they may need another space that would have additional costs. The study commission also has the ability to retain employees and services that would also be funded with taxpayer dollars, so he said staff will probably adjust the estimate upward when they bring a draft resolution to the commission.

A study commission can recommend changes to the existing form of government; a change to one of the other forms of government authorized under state law; draft a charter; recommend municipal-county consolidation; recommend disincorporation; or make no recommendation. A municipal study commission may also recommend service consolidation or transfer in cooperation with a county study commission, according to a city memo.

The city has operated under a manager form of government since 1973.

In 1986, the city commission adopted a charter on the recommendation of the 1986 study commission to give itself self-governing powers.

That group also recommended maintaining the manager form of government for the city.

How do I find that? Tips on navigating local government

Great Falls had an alderman form of government prior to 1973, according to the city clerk’s office.

In December 1972, a group of citizens placed a petition on the ballot for a special election to change to a commission form of government with the intent of hiring a city manager, according to Bill Bronson, a former city commissioner.

Bronson was a high school senior at the time and chair of a government education project sponsored by the YMCA that took a public stance in favor of the manager form of government.

The proposal passed in the special election and became effective in March 1973. An election was held for commissioners at that time and the new commission appointed the first city manager, Dick Thomas, who had been the manager in Arvada, Colo., Bronson said.

Local agencies working to provide crisis response after Alluvion cuts program

That form of government was in place until the charter was adopted in 1986, which maintained the manager form.

From 1973-1986, the city had operated with five commissioners and the highest vote getting commission candidate became the presiding officer and ceremonial mayor for a two-year period, Bronson said.

The 1986 study commission recommended electing the mayor at-large but retained the two-year term.

In 2014, the question of a review of the City of Great Falls’ form of government failed at the primary election by a vote of 6,983 opposed to 3,954 in favor.

City supporting campaign on local control

The 2004-2006 study commission had five members who made one recommendation, by a 3-2 vote, to increase the size of the commission to six commissioners and one mayor. That change wasn’t approved by voters.

It was the same recommendation made by the 1996 study commission that failed with 16,000 opposed and 7,000 in favor, according to city records. The minority opinion of the 2006 group was that the additional $19,950 in annual taxpayer expense could be better spend on police officers, firefighters and parks, according to city records.

The 1994-96 study commission included seven members who made three recommendations, to elect the mayor to four year terms, increase the size of the commission and to establish neighborhood councils. The voters only adopted the neighborhood councils.