Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Voting on Item not on Agenda & not introduced in New Business


Guest Concerned Citizen

Recommended Posts

Guest Concerned Citizen

So at a City Meeting, a Mayor begins discussion on needing approval of money allocated for a trip that is at least 400 miles away. He began the discussion during another part that was on the agenda for approval of travel & training for City Employees. This was for a different set of of travel expenses NOT on the agenda. Knowing Robert's Rules of Order, he should have brought that issue during the New Business section of the meeting, correct? There were 2 commissioners absent due to campaigning but had quorum since 2 other commissioners not running for election plus Mayor were present. Now my question is, could this approval of travel expenses be NULL & VOIDED since it did NOT follow Robert's Rule of Order? What can a concerned citizen do since this expenditure is truly unnecessary. Thanks for any advice!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was indeed improper for the mayor to bring up a different item than the one under discussion.  However, if no point of order was raised immediately, it is too late to do anything about it now. See page 250.

 

I get the impression (from between the last two lines) that you are not a member of the city council.  What you have available (only) is the vote.  Throw the rascals out, next election cycle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Knowing Robert's Rules of Order, he should have brought that issue during the New Business section of the meeting, correct?

Yes.

Now my question is, could this approval of travel expenses be NULL & VOIDED since it did NOT follow Robert's Rule of Order?

No. In most cases, a Point of Order must be raised at the time of the violation.

It may be that the council or applicable law has additional rules on this subject, and if so, the decision may be null and void if those rules were violated. It is not, however, null and void due to any rule in RONR.

What can a concerned citizen do since this expenditure is truly unnecessary.

Probably nothing, other than to vote for other people in the next election and persuade your fellow citizens to do the same. If some rule in applicable law was violated, you could consult a lawyer to see if you might have dome legal recourse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So at a City Meeting, a Mayor begins discussion on needing approval of money allocated for a trip that is at least 400 miles away. He began the discussion during another part that was on the agenda for approval of travel & training for City Employees. This was for a different set of of travel expenses NOT on the agenda. Knowing Robert's Rules of Order, he should have brought that issue during the New Business section of the meeting, correct? There were 2 commissioners absent due to campaigning but had quorum since 2 other commissioners not running for election plus Mayor were present. Now my question is, could this approval of travel expenses be NULL & VOIDED since it did NOT follow Robert's Rule of Order? What can a concerned citizen do since this expenditure is truly unnecessary. Thanks for any advice!

 

No it can't be nullified if nobody raised a point of order at the time.

 

As a concerned citizen, there's not much you can do from a parliamentary perspective, since you are not a member.  So my advice is to run for city commissioner.  Failing that, at least vote for people who will follow the rules.

 

However, as Mr. Martin points out, there may be some statutory prohibitions about the way this was done that could trump the rules in RONR, but I wouldn't hold out too much hope of that.  

 

(I'm not a lawyer and the following is not legal advice, but I'd be surprised if there are many jurisdictions where such a decision would be voided merely because it was adopted at the wrong point in the agenda.  That's usually the sort of small-potatoes violation with penalties ranging from stern words all the way up to a slap on the wrist.)

 

Of course, I've been surprised before.

 

It seems to me that your objection to this is not really procedural in nature, but rather that the decision was, in your view, a bad decision.  In such cases, my advice is nearly always to fight the matter on the merits, and not count upon procedural technicalities to save you.  in the long term they won't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...