08/26/2002 Meeting Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Special Council Minutes of 8/2(/2002 discussion, and the vote should be immediately taken without comments from the chair. After asking for clarification of the challenge, Mr. O'Grady said that Mr. Miller had the floor. Law Director Dubelko said the motion to challenge was now moot. Mr. Gareau said he would like to state for the record his personal objection to the fact that, when a member of Council makes a motion and there is a second and a call for the question, the President of Council continues to speak and does not call for the question as he is required to do under the Rules of Council when debate and discussion stop at the call for the question. Mr. O'Grady made the point, for the record, that it is his responsibility as President of Council to maintain decorum, to maintain order. He will do that in an impartial and fair way to the best of his ability. He asked Mr. 1V1iller to proceed. Mr. Miller expressed his opinion that the chair had interrupted him and other people when he does not agree with what is being said. These are public meetings, and people can speak on the issues as they see fit. The chair should not limit public discussion. Mr. O'Grady disagreed, and there was another challenge to the chair which prompted another lively discussion as to the proce~lings. Councilman McKay called for a recess. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. Council recessed at 8:10 p.m. Council reconvened at 8:20 p.m. Discussion continued with President O'Grady asking the Law Director to instruct Council with regard to the responsibilities of the president and the ability of members of Council to challenge the chair. Law Director said all members have functions on Council, and everyone has to operate under the same rules. First, the President of Council clearly is the person who presides over the meeting, so it is important that he be given the latitude to do his job. Council Rule 8 indicates that: "He shall preserve order and decorum;" He has to make an effort to do that in the way that he sees fit. The rules further state that the president should "prevent personalities or the impugning of members' motives; confine members in debate to questions under discussion ....and decide pourts of order subject to an appeal of Council." Clearly, even though Council has authority to appeal rulings of the chair, and it should exercise that authority, he thinks for business to get done, members of Council have to give some latitude to the President of Council to facilitate the discussions during the meeting. At the same time, he would say on the other side, the chair as a responsibility to appear at all times impartial, to refrain really from getting into the merits of the debate--because it's really not the function of the chair. Certainly the chair can be challenged. But, at the same time, the chair shouldn't have to stop on a dime. People should be given latitude with language and doing their jobs. Those are his opinions at this time. These are Council's rules, and he does not have a formal role in enforcing those rules. Mr. Miller continued his comments and said he did not intend to impugn anyone's integrity. However, logistically speaking, he doesn't understand how any individual could send a letter to Council telling them what should be done when Council only this evening received the amendmems from Mrs. Kasler. So that person, whoever that writer may be, would not have had the numbers that Council received from Mrs. Kasler this evening. Therefore, the person could not have been properly informed to write those recommendations. You cannot put the cart before the horse. Certainly, there is no intention to impugn the reputation of anyone. He would remind all members of Council that these meetings are public meetings and it's very hard for anyone to know any other 6