The City Council's Rules of Order somehow surfaced this week from the Bermuda Triangle that is my household. I had been looking for them since they were approved for 2013 at the Jan. 3 reorganization.
They were impressive when first launched in 2006, perhaps because of the passion with which Council President Ray Blanco put them forth. Just a few months later, Blanco died of a heart attack and his passion was lost to the city.
Rashid Burney revived the rules when he became council president in 2009, and in 2010 Annie McWilliams added a requirement for written reports from the many committees established in the rules.
The rules came to the fore recently when David Minchello, the city's newly-named corporation counsel, alluded to sections while advising the council on procedures. On Jan. 14, he referenced section 3.4 when reminding Councilman William Reid that the rules limit debate to the question before the body. (In the older version, that rule was 3.3) Reid had been acting as chairman of the committee of the whole when he branched off into a speeech about vacancies in key administrative posts.
It turns out that the version of Rules of Order approved on Jan. 3 differs quite a bit from earlier ones and Plaintalker wondered how these changes came about without any public discussion. The Rules of Order may be perceived as an internal document of the governing body, but some of the changes affect the public, such as when and how long public comment is permitted. For example,there was no public comment before council deliberations on Jan. 14, but it had previously been allowed.
One section questioned by Dr. Yood states that council members must be present in the chambers to vote, but last year a number of votes were taken over a speakerphone. Minchello said state law permits voting by telephone.
Part of the problem may be that the 2009 version referred to the City Charter, the Municipal Code and Robert's Rules of Order, but also included a number of items specific to that year, such as a new Monday-Wednesday meeting schedule. The council has since changed back to Mondays only. Another innovation, "working conferences," has faded away in recent years. (See Plaintalker's post on the first one in 2006 here.)
Soon after the Rules of Order were proposed by Blanco in March 2006, Joe and Dottie Gutenkauf reviewed them and identified a number of problems, including redundancies to the charter and Robert's Rules and confusing limits on public participation. If there are still problems with the rules now, what should be done? They were adopted on Jan. 3, warts and all. Should revisions be attempted? Maybe minimally the 2011 version on the city's web site could be updated to reflect what the council approved for 2013. Then at least the public will have a handy reference to what rules the governing body has agreed to abide by this year.
--Bernice
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
oh Bernice.... Rules??? Why they're for the little people like us...
ReplyDeleteThe mystery on when, and how, changes to the current rules were made can be found, if anything, at the Executive Session Minutes of the council executive sessions -that I recall the council had pretty good Executive Session agendas that were made public but one has to request the Minutes to see what was said at the discussions. If no discussion was made, and no agreements were made behind closed doors, then there is little justification as to how changes were made. More interesting though: What do the other council members say about the changes? Are they happy?
ReplyDeleteNo amount of rules can withstand the ready willingness to break them. When the mission is distinctly geared to permit rulemakers to indulge their conflicts of interest and enrich their own, then we've got a big problem, tyranny.
ReplyDeleteAlan,
ReplyDeleteEven the worst of the tyrants has fallen under pressure from the "little people" as Rob likes to call us - "us" are us, simple mortals ;-) Hmm. I wonder what can be used as a symbol when the historic fall of our tyrants come?
Maria.. they're going no where fast.
DeleteRules are only meant for some.
ReplyDeleteDid you know that at the police department If a supervisor tells officers that they have to abide by the rules and regulations of the department and to do their jobs.Some go to the mayor and director about it and next thing you know the supervisor gets transfered.
With a current tyrant, council president Rivers, I don't think there will be much discussion or fair and open discussion. We can only hope that this year will go fast, they mayor will be voted out, and Rivers will be out of a job next year.
ReplyDelete