Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "When Is An Amendment Not An Amendment ?":
Sorry. Rule question again. Is there anything to prevent an emergency Council meeting to say 'we screwed up' and correct this mess? It is their Council and they are entitled to goof. Is there no remedy?
**********
It could happen . It would require at least a quorum of Council to attend.
They would have to agree to the need for correction. I think there was beginning to be a realisation the change wasn't practical.
Before he would vote on the changed motion, Councillor Pirri asked for an outline of how exactly it was going to work. There was no reassurance that it would accomplish anything that had not already been tried.
The upcoming month is March break, nothing much can get during that time. A Special Meeting of Council only needs forty-eight hours notice and the purpose declared. The Procedure would have to be waived to re-consider the motion. Two thirds vote of council is required to waive procedure If the three remnants of the past were not willing, and six or even five were willing it could be done.
It should never have happened. An amendment cannot change the intent of a resolution. Council should have been advised.
It's why we require notices of motion prior to motions. It provides time for certainty of intent.
People were tired.
Nobody should underestimate the effect of a crowd like that.
The only thing missing was the stomp of boots on a bare floor to intimidate council. Misinformation and mischief was rampant.
Meek and mild expressions of willingness to co-operate from board members were refuted entirely by the statements of Mayor Dawe and Councillors Pirri and Abel of what they had encountered in their efforts.
The Mayor drew attention to a culled e-mail list used by a staff person at the centre to circulate the misinformation. He did not go easy on them. That's why the turn around was so unexpected and unbeleivable.
The campaign to challenge the town's authority was enough to get each and every one responsible booted from any position of responsibility
Theresa met someone at the town hall last night who had been a member of the board and quit because of the politics. He wasn't there in their support.
Not only are they accountable to no-one, they have no sense whatsoever of the unacceptability of their conduct.No more than the three Councillors who created the contract in the first place.
Ballard wasn't even a Councillor. Just one of the many people promoted in the last term to have influence never intended by the electorate.
As the saying goes;
It's not corruption you have to worry about. It's stupidity.
Too many rules have been broken. I will admit most are stupid but necessary. There is a tiny window of opportunity to save the thing as they must have realized their error - except for the usual 3. It can be done but it takes will and some are still dining out on the experience. Redemption is possible for only three and it is a limited time offer, very limited. Humphreys, T Thompson and Dawe - last kick at the can. You seriously blew it but can fix the mess. Otherwise it is yours.
ReplyDeleteThe same situation was with that software purchase. No attempt to repair the damage and limit costs. Spine and will seem lacking but there is time before the next election. Otherwise it will be there to bite butts, all on TV And I will be one of those who asks the awkward questions.
ReplyDeleteThere is time: make it work.
ReplyDeleteWhy aren't the councillors listening to each other ? Abel and Pirri have reported that the Centre refuses to negotiate. In this house there are people hard of hearing and they at least yell at each other. TRY, dammit.
ReplyDeleteDoesn't the original mover have to agree any amendments? I have heard the chair in the past ask the mover whether or not they were agreeable to a change. Was that just a courtesy, or is it part of the procedural bylaw? I didn't see it all, but since they voted against their "own" motion in the end, doesn't that mean that they were not agreeable to the change?
ReplyDeleteSee text below, copied here from Aurora's procedural bylaw. Item 7.11(b) would suggest that the amendment was, in fact, in contravention of the procedural bylaw. Procedural bylaw was NOT waived as far as I know, so shouldn't the amended motion by ruled in contravention of the bylaw, and therefore be struck null and void?
ReplyDeleteMotion to Amend
7.11 A motion to amend:
(a) Shall be open to debate and shall be relevant to the main motion; and
(b) Shall not propose a direct negative to the main motion.
(c) Only one motion to amend a motion shall be on the floor at any one time.
I was there Tuesday evening.
ReplyDeleteWhat began as sincere expressions of concern about history and culture was eventually hijacked by some of the ragtag remnants of the late Morris regime. Try though they might, they could not keep that nasty whine out of their voices. It was a disgrace to be in the same room and have to listen to the greasy words sliding forth from their throats.
Culture is not about power or intimidation. It is not about a painting or a pot or a symphony, a novel, a one-act play or a favourite dish from back home that your great-grandmother taught you how to make. Culture is our everyday way of life. In this country we like to say that we are a multi-cultural society because we have received and embraced people from around the world. Are there any cultural centres in Canada that exist as a result of an agreement? Or do they exist because the people of that particular culture have decided to create something to express and display some of their ancestry?
As to the behaviour of Council members, that was shameful. Few, if any, understood what was being discussed, what was moved, what was on the table. Listening to the glissade of applause whenever one of the three miscreants gave voice to an incomplete thought made me wish I had not eaten shortly beforehand.
If the mayor is unsure of the procedural niceties surely it is incumbent on the Town Clerk or CAO, members of the Executive Team, to catch his attention, suggest a pause for a moment or two, clarify what is or isn't happening, and then explain to those assembled the status of the discussion. Take a few minutes to reorganize the discussion so that it may proceed in an orderly fashion in such manner that the participants understand what is what.
This event should be struck from the record book of Aurora Council and replaced by a special Council meeting at which the matter should be debated in a civil and orderly fashion, with all participants fully understanding what they are talking about so that when the time comes to vote they can do so objectively and intelligently.
Neither of these was present Tuesday evening.
How many bloody rules were broken during that meeting?
ReplyDeleteOur problem is that we have no concept of bullying and/fighting dirty. Wallmark approached my husband in the parking lot, a complete stranger, to lecture him about extending the contract for 2 more years. He referred her to Mar's report and she decided it was cold out there.
But I do not know how to behave like a bulldozer, how to make Council see what they have done or how to force them to have a last kick at this can.
If Dawe is ignoring expert advice and heeding that of a few staff members, I cannot insinuate myself and my concerns into his line of vision. It will take an epiphany and he shows no sign of understanding his current mess.
In order to repair the damage, a sufficient number of councillors would have to recognize that damage has been done. I have very little hope that this could happen.
ReplyDelete