Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Nominations for council president are not debatable


Guest Jim Brady

Recommended Posts

Who would be in charge of following such a suggestion, and are there other suggestiions which may be followed? This meeting is tomorrow at 5:30 following the private gathering at 5.

Any member may make a motion regarding nominations, and how they should be handled. Such a motion is not debatable, but it is amendable.

A majority vote is required for all motions relating to nominations, except to Close Nominations, which requires a 2/3 vote and is not in order when anyone is seeking to make a nomination. It is more appropriate to simply declare nominations closed when no one wishes to make any more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 66
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Who is qualified to take the initiatiative and say " let's come up with a format to debate" because for certain none is currently in place.

Asked and answered: ANY MEMBER.

But the best thing to say is not "Let's come up with a format"; the best thing to say is, "I move that nominations be handled in the following manner:...". Best to have it in writing, too, so you can hand a copy to the chair.

It would not be debatable. (Who's going to argue against having nominations some way or another?) But it would be amendable. Anyone who wants to change the method is free to suggest amendments to your motion, but none of them are debatable either. Majority rules all around.

And make sure you arrange with someone to have your motion(s) seconded. In groups unused to doing things the right way, a proper motion can simply cause people to sit there stunned with their mouths open, and your motion will die for lack of a second.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Everyone! I want to thank everyone for all your help for my first election vote. I want to let you know what happened. I was sworn in tonight for Alderman in Ward 1 in the City of Olean, NY. I brought my debates that I wrote both for and against the nominations that I was looking forward to coming up. I also was going to make a motion that nominations be handled in the following manner:

I move that nominations be handled in the following manner:

The presiding offer states "Nominations are now in order for the President of the Common Council"

Member - "I nominate Mr. A for President"

Presiding officer - A is nominated.

Member that nominated A - has the floor.

Every member then has the right to speak.

Presiding officer - Any other nominations?

Member - "I nominate Mr. B for President".

Presiding officer - B is nominated.

Member that nominated B - has the floor.

Every member then has the right to speak.

Presiding officer - Any other nominations?

If another nomination - same as above.

If none,

Votes taken for A

Votes taken for B

Motion to adjourn.

I sat down in my chair after the swearing in. I reached to get the nomination procedure proposal above in my folder and before I could even take it out. Nominations were closed and a vote was taken. This took a total of about 4.7 seconds. The person was motioning to make a nomination next to me and the chair said "you will not speak unless recognized". I did a point of order and she said it is time to vote. I then did another point of order to present my proposed nominating procedures and she said we did that already and you have to vote yes or no" I just thought would fill you in on what happened. I was hoping when I ran for office that our government would operate in accordance with these rules. Many people have spent many hours helping me and I used their suggestions. By the way I lost 4-3. So much for rules. Please let me know what you think about this. 4.7 seconds is a pretty quick election process -- I did get 3 point of orders in - those and at least 3 raising of my hand. Can somebody please let me know what can be done next. I will put exact wording of what happened as I taped the proceeding. Thanks again. Can someone also let me know if this is the quickest closing of a nomination in america - 4.7 seconds

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please let me know what you think about this.

What happened was highly improper. The chair does not have the authority to unilaterally close debate, it is not necessary to obtain recognition to make a nomination, and it is not proper to close nominations to prevent the making of legitimate nominations.

Can somebody please let me know what can be done next.

Unfortunately, nothing really. While what happened was improper, nothing happened which would constitute a continuing breach. An appeal could have been raised at the time, after the chair ruled on one of your Points of Order. There is really nothing which can be done now, at least from a parliamentary perspective.

I suppose you could take disciplinary action, but I doubt RONR will be of much help there. As this is a public body, I assume you have highly customized disciplinary procedures.

I will put exact wording of what happened as I taped the proceeding.

I would rather you didn't. It is highly unlikely what anyone said has any parliamentary relevance. (Well, the rulings of the chair, perhaps, but I doubt even those will change the situation.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Everyone! Please let me know what you think about this.

I'm guessing the majority are OK with the way it's being/been done. While your attempts are noble, you might just be pissing in the wind. Even if you appealed the chair's ruling, I wonder if a majority would've voted with you. Nothing parliamentary about my opinion at all; just a hunch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I'm guessing the majority are OK with the way it's being/been done. While your attempts are noble, you might just be pissing in the wind. Even if you appealed the chair's ruling, I wonder if a majority would've voted with you. Nothing parliamentary about my opinion at all; just a hunch.

Hi!

After the voting for the president on January 3, 2011, the minutes were published on the City website dated January, 4, 2011. The minutes regarding the nomination and election state (I will leave off the names of the members)" Mayor W asked for nominations for Council President. Opening nominations for Alderman S for Council President by Alderman

J and seconded by Alderman F. Motion to close nominations was made by Alderman J seconded by Alderman M. Roll call for Alderman S as Council President, ayes Alderman

M, Alderman F, Alderman S and Alderman J. Nayes: Alderman B, Alderman K, and Alderman E. Motion Carried." Nothing in the minutes referenced the members that wanted additional nominations or the move to motion for the prodedures to be used for the nominating process. Please let me know how the minutes can be revised and any other information you can give me regarding the approval of minutes and generally how they should be handled for the election process. Thanks again for your time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please let me know how the minutes can be revised and any other information you can give me regarding the approval of minutes and generally how they should be handled for the election process.

Personally, I'd be most concerned about making sure the Points of Order and the chair's rulings on them are included in the minutes. At any rate, when the minutes are pending for approval, any member may offer a correction. Corrections are generally handled by unanimous consent, but if there is a dispute, majority rules. If the minutes have already been approved, you need to use the motion to Amend Something Previously Adopted, which requires a 2/3 vote, vote of a majority of the entire membership, or majority vote with previous notice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I'd be most concerned about making sure the Points of Order and the chair's rulings on them are included in the minutes.

As the clerk of this specific meeting - a motion was never made except for a member stating "I would like to make a motion" would that be entered into the minutes? The presiding officer of the meeting did not recognize the request for a motion and asked for the vote viva voce. No motion was accually made. No point of order was specified (or mentioned at the meeting). If it wasn't done, it should not be included in the minutes, correct?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I'd be most concerned about making sure the Points of Order and the chair's rulings on them are included in the minutes.

As the clerk of this specific meeting - a motion was never made except for a member stating "I would like to make a motion" would that be entered into the minutes? The presiding officer of the meeting did not recognize the request for a motion and asked for the vote viva voce. No motion was accually made. No point of order was specified (or mentioned at the meeting). If it wasn't done, it should not be included in the minutes, correct?

If the motion was never made, what was voted on?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the motion was never made, what was voted on?

I apologize for being a bit vague.

A member asked to make a motion while the presiding officer was asking for the vote on a previously stated motion for president. The request was denied. Again the same member asked to make a motion, again denied. Voting proceeded. Should the minutes reflect this request to make a motion and denial? No actual business happened in connection with the request for a motion as the motion did not state … well, anything (e.g. motion to amend).

I hope I was able to explain the situation enough for assistance. Thanks again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the motion was never made, what was voted on?

I apologize for being a bit vague.

A member asked to make a motion while the presiding officer was asking for the vote on a previously stated motion for president. The request was denied. Again the same member asked to make a motion, again denied. Voting proceeded. Should the minutes reflect this request to make a motion and denial? No actual business happened in connection with the request for a motion as the motion did not state … well, anything (e.g. motion to amend).

I hope I was able to explain the situation enough for assistance. Thanks again.

No, if she was never recognized, there's no need to record her "outbursts" in the minutes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As the clerk of this specific meeting - a motion was never made except for a member stating "I would like to make a motion" would that be entered into the minutes?

For future reference, it would be best to put these sorts of competing facts into a new post. We've had lengthy debates in the past between guests about what really happened at a meeting, and this tends to be unproductive since we have no way of knowing which set of facts is accurate. We prefer to simply treat competing sets of facts as separate situations and inform people of the rules as best as we can, and let the people actually involved in the situation handle arguments about the facts.

To answer your question, no, a member requesting to make a motion would not be included in the minutes.

If it wasn't done, it should not be included in the minutes, correct?

Correct.

A member asked to make a motion while the presiding officer was asking for the vote on a previously stated motion for president. The request was denied. Again the same member asked to make a motion, again denied. Voting proceeded. Should the minutes reflect this request to make a motion and denial?

Well, it seems improper to deny a request to make a motion without knowing what the motion was, but no, if no motion or Point of Order was made, there is nothing to record. For future reference, if someone requests to make a motion, the President should ask what the motion is so as to determine whether the motion is in order at that time. I would treat a request to make a motion as a Parliamentary Inquiry, one for which the chair will need more facts in order to properly answer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A member asked to make a motion while the presiding officer was asking for the vote on a previously stated motion for president. The request was denied. Again the same member asked to make a motion, again denied. Voting proceeded. Should the minutes reflect this request to make a motion and denial?

Note also that if voting had already begun, your presiding officer was correct in denying the request to make a motion. Interruptions during voting are not permitted by RONR (p. 408)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Note also that if voting had already begun, your presiding officer was correct in denying the request to make a motion. Interruptions during voting are not permitted by RONR (p. 408)

Interesting... I missed that part. If this is correct, I agree that the presiding officer acted properly in denying the request.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I apologize for being a bit vague.

A member asked to make a motion while the presiding officer was asking for the vote on a previously stated motion for president. The request was denied. Again the same member asked to make a motion, again denied. Voting proceeded. Should the minutes reflect this request to make a motion and denial? No actual business happened in connection with the request for a motion as the motion did not state … well, anything (e.g. motion to amend).

I hope I was able to explain the situation enough for assistance. Thanks again.

Note also that if voting had already begun, your presiding officer was correct in denying the request to make a motion. Interruptions during voting are not permitted by RONR (p. 408)

I think two critical elements here are 1) what was the motion the member wanted to make (particularly would that motion have been in order at the time), and 2) had voting actually begun? Page 408 (ll. 24-29) states "Interruptions during the taking of the vote are permitted only before any member has actually voted....." (emphasis added).

The fact that the presiding officer was "asking for the vote" (whatever that means, despite our possible interpretation) may not be as relevant if the member wanted to move a motion that would have been in order at the time, and no votes had been yet cast. Clearly, the member should have stated her motion, after having been recognized by the chair, and not simply stated she wanted to make a motion. But all of this is spilt milk over the dam now, I guess.

I'm also curious what "previously stated motion for president" means, but that's just because it doesn't make sense to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...