City Council debates representation and potential reduction ahead of November ballot

In a recent Billings City Council work session held on July 7, 2025, council members engaged in a robust discussion regarding potential changes to the council's structure, specifically the number of representatives per ward. The conversation was sparked by the need to decide whether to place a proposal on the November ballot that could reduce the council size from ten members to as few as six.

Council members expressed concerns about the pace of decision-making, emphasizing the importance of community input and thorough consideration of the implications of such a significant change. One council member articulated the need for more time to reflect on the proposal, stating, "These are big choices... I’m pretty confident we don’t have the time to give it all that it deserves." This sentiment was echoed by others who highlighted the necessity of balancing internal council dynamics with public representation.

The discussion revealed a divide among council members regarding the optimal number of representatives. Some argued for maintaining the current structure, citing the benefits of having multiple voices per ward to ensure diverse representation. Others suggested that a smaller council could lead to more efficient decision-making, with one member noting that "50% of the board does 90% of the work," implying that a reduction in size might streamline operations.

Concerns about representation were paramount, with several council members stressing the importance of ensuring that all community voices are heard. One member pointed out that reducing the number of council members could lead to a perception of diminished public engagement, stating, "We have to balance the importance of the group of council members... against the public interest."

As the council deliberated, the potential for a public vote on the matter emerged as a key point of contention. Some members advocated for allowing voters to decide on the proposed changes, arguing that it would empower the community and provide a clearer mandate for any structural adjustments. "It doesn’t hurt anything to ask the voters," one member stated, emphasizing the simplicity of the question at hand.

The meeting concluded with a consensus to continue discussions and gather public feedback before making a final decision. Council members acknowledged the need for further engagement with constituents to gauge their opinions on the proposed changes. As the council prepares for its next meeting on July 28, the outcome of this debate remains uncertain, but it underscores the ongoing challenges of governance and representation in a growing city.