On Sunday I half wished I was a candidate for Mayor. I like to answer questions. Mayoralty candidates only had the opportunity. It's how it has to be. In a hundred different ways, the Office of Mayor is most important. Voters need to witness the performance in a given circumstance
.
A question was asked about town business being conducted after midnight and at one o'clock in the morning, and how that might be changed.
The procedural bylaw and the clause allowing thirty-minutes for a Councillor to speak to a question was referenced by the Mayor who speculated the length of meetings, if eight Councillors took up that amount of time.
I would like to have been able to speak about time spent by staff and Council on the Procedural bylaw. Last time, I checked it was fifty-nine pages long. It should be eighteen
The first and only order of business on the Agenda on the Night of Council's Inaugural, is passage of the Procedural Bylaw.
Councillors-elect may not take their seats until they have sworn their Oath of Office.
The business of the corporation cannot proceed without passage of the Bylaw for Procedure.
The Procedural Bylaw sets out, the calender of meetings for the term . It states where they will be held. The hour of start and adjournment . Agendas must be posted in advance so that all may know the items of town business are to be decided .
The Bylaw includes the Rules of Order .
It is legislated guarantee to the community, to open, transparent and orderly governance.
It is the function of the Municipal Clerk to bring together the Agenda of items of business requiring Council's attention.
Public forum is not town business. Presenting awards is not . Announcements of events by Councillors is not. Presentations by invitation of the Mayor are not . Friends of the Mayor invited to heap abuse on the head of an elected representative who may be a critic of the Mayor, is not.
None of the foregoing are the" business of the municipality"
They are misuse of Council's scheduled time to deal with town business.
Add- ons to the agenda on the night of a meeting are not in order. The Procedural Bylaw requires publication of agendas in advance. Except for emergency,and by a vote of two-thirds of members present to waive the procedural bylaw, add-ons are not in order.
Endless erratic and frequently erroneous ruminations by the presiding member in response to every issue that arises from wherever, in the course of a meeting, are not in accordance with rules of order.
Unlimited questions from Councillors to staff, are not debate and are not in accordance with the rules.
Appointed Officers directed by the presiding member to refute debating points made by elected representatives are a breach of order and misuse of time allocated for town business.
Interruptions of a member speaking, because of disagreement with the members comments, are a breach of the rules and a misuse of time.
The hour of adjournment is legislatively set in the Procedural Bylaw.
Hours of Council's time used for matters, not the business of the municipality, is a waste of the time set and an abuse of process.
Starting a meeting later than the appointed time is an abuse of process.
Start of town business, half an hour before the hour of adjournment, in a three and a half hour council meeting, and continuing the meeting until 1.00 am. is an abuse of process.
When I leave a Council meeting at the hour of adjournment, I do not leave early. I leave at the legislated hour for completion of the business.
When I raise my hand in opposition to extending the hour of adjournment to a unstated time, I am opposing misuse of legislated set time to deal with the corporation's business and a flagrant abuse of process.
Wilfull ignorance of content and intent of the Procedural Bylaw, incompetence in maintaining order and acquiescence by the majority of Council is the reason town business is being conducted between 10.30 pm, the legislated hour of adjournment, and 1.00 am.
Hours when no member of the community may be expected to witness town business being conducted,despite legislated requirements to ensure the opportunity.
Tuesday, 5 October 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
It's unfortunate that the town doesn't have a Sargent -at-Arms.
This person could remove the offending member by use of physical force if necessary.
Three such removals would result in loss of pay for one month.
And endless removals would have the mayor paying the town to be permitted to make a ballocks of things!
She might even have decided to resign.
To be fair, you should include the procedural bylaw for people to see - your concerns may be addressed in it.
In an article in one of the papers last week relating to the mayoralty candidates visiting a bunch of Grade 5-ers, the mayor reportedly stressed the importance of her history and years of experience. Rather hypocritical don't you think, considering she always dismisses and trashes yours at every opportunity?
What a two-faced you-know-what she is!
The difference between Phyliss stating the importance of history and Evelyn doing the same is one's history is recent and relevant - the other is so old that it is not relevant any more. Not saying that Evelyn is not relevant, but the world was a different place when she was Mayor. You can't live in the past.
Post a Comment