motion to deny

[Guest susie]

Applicant submitted plan to city planning commission. After heated dialogue, one commissioner motioned to approve the plan. Motion never got supported. So it died.

The applicant wanted the commission to pass two motions. One to deny her plan. Then she wanted another one approving a plan that would be drawn up by city engineer. Unknown and Unseen. Commissioners refused.

After more discussion the Commission moved to deny the original plan and direct the city engineer to come up with plan to be submitted at next meeting. Applicant left in a huff.

Was everything done correctly? We smell a lawsuit brewing.

[jstackpo]

From an RONR point of view things went reasonably well, if not perfectly.  There should have been a motion to accept her plan BEFORE the "heated dialogue" got under way  --  otherwise how would you know, technically, what you were debating?   I'll presume your statement "The motion never got supported" means that a motion to adopt the plan was not formally made at all.  This means that the commission hasn't really said if it likes the plan or not, although there is probably the strong implication that a motion to approve the plan would be defeated (which would end the matter for a while).

Your motion to "deny the plan" is a tad out of order.  Defeating a motion to adopt the plan is quite sufficient to prevent the plan from going forward - no need to "deny it".  Besides, if the motion to "deny" was defeated, then what?  That would be not at all equivalent, logically, to adopting the plan.  Keep all motions positive, if possible. Don't move to "not do something".

So when the city engineer presents the plan, be sure to more to adopt the plan, and then defeat that motion (if that is your preference).  I can't say if your huffy applicant still would have a legal case  --  that is up to the lawyers, not the parliamentarians.

If your planning commission works under rules that are different or modified from RONR, follow them of course, and check with your lawyer.