About Those Pesky Rules

Robert the Bruce has left a new comment on your post "The Reported Out Motion":

Evelyn Buck wrote:
Generally when a Councillor moves a motion it's understood the Councillor supports the motion..


However it is not against any rules that someone moves a motion but not support it? I have seen instances when a counciller will move a motion to at least get it on the table for discussion. Also, I have seen a mover have a "change of heart" and retract their "moving" after debate

********

It is true that a Councillor may move a resolution "to get it on the table for discussion" It is not good practice.

Records are precise. The objective is accuracy. There must be no room for interpretation.

Business completed by Council is confirmed by Bylaw.

That's why Yvonne Cattrell's accusatory and critical comments of staff had no place on the last agenda. They are now undisputed as part of the formal record.

The Clerk's responsibility to to record the decisions of Council "without note or comment" If the statement is, 'I move the motion to get it on the table for discussion", only the Councillor's name is recorded.

If a Councillor moves a motion and after discussion, decides he cannot support it wishes to withdraw support,Council must authorize the withdrawal.I think that may require two-thirds majority vote.

The point is, it takes a motion to be moved and seconded to get it on the table for discussion. Council is then in possession of the motion.It no longer belongs to the mover and seconder.

If the mover after discussion, can no longer support the motion and wishes to disassociate his name from it,the only way to do that is to ask Council's approval to withdraw as mover.

The proceeding becomes part of the record.

It's not a given.If a motion has been under discussion for some time its appropriate disposition is by vote.

A Councillor who moves a motion should be very sure he knows what he's doing. Flip flops do not reflect well on a person's competence. Wasting Council's time discussing a motion which might otherwise never have reached the table, is not good acceptable practice.

The record shows.

A recorded vote is requested if a Councillor has strong conviction on an issue and wants his/her position to be on the record.

When an issue is not controversial or unanimous support is apparent, a request for a recorded vote is also a waste of Council's time and removes clarity from the record.

The purpose of the rules is to expedite the business of the corporation and complete it by the hour of adjournment set by Bylaw.

The Municipal Act requires a Councillor to vote. Under the law ,a councillor is not permitted to abstain. Abstention shows in the record as a negative vote.

The only way a Councillor can avoid voting is to remove him or herself from the Council Chamber.The record shows those present at the meeting. If a vote is recorded,the count for members voting must match members present at the time of the vote.

New Councillors need time to wrap their heads around the rules. They can't learn except by doing. The Presiding Member needs the skills to guide and assist new Councillors in their understanding. Good will,consistency and impartiality are essential.

The Clerk needs to be on hand to add his expertise to the task while at the same time exercising discretion in not being seen to be influencing Council decisions.

Anyone watching last term's Council learned nothing at all about the rules. Except how bad things can be if there is no respect or a common understanding of why a council can't function without them.

We heard a lot about how dysfunctional the last two Councils were and why this or that person was to blame.

When people around the table have no understanding of the rules or why they are necessary and the presiding member wrote her own on the fly and the Clerk was kept at a distance,I always found it interesting how some watchers were so convinced they had it figured and knew exactly who was to blame.

I was surprised to see Councillor Gaertner's name in the minutes of the meeting as having moved the resolution reported out from the in-camera meeting last week. There was certainly no need for one who did not support the motion to get it on the table for discussion.Nor was that comment made.