Chair Preson Personal Judgement

[Guest Gary C]

Our towns public meetings follow RRON. Recently the chairperson of a public government committee insulted and judged a citizen with misinformation, then denied the citizen an opportuity to speak on the matter in their own defense, claiming that is a chairpersons right to do. Does RRON allow this?   Thank you. Gary

[Joshua Katz]

No. The chair is not permitted to insult citizens with misinformation, just as any member is not - and I'm going to guess none of it was germane to the pending motion, either. Plus, the chair should not debate a pending motion (other than an appeal) in the first place. As for speaking in his own defense, he probably can't do that either, not because the chair can refuse to recognize people, but because that, too, was not germane to the pending motion. He should instead raise a point of order to the chair's behavior, and appeal (which will obviously be necessary). He could also move to declare the chair vacant if the chair is not going to preside in an impartial manner, or bring disciplinary action for behavior during a meeting, as discussed in RONR. 

[George Mervosh]

5 minutes ago, Joshua Katz said:

No. The chair is not permitted to insult citizens with misinformation, just as any member is not - and I'm going to guess none of it was germane to the pending motion, either. Plus, the chair should not debate a pending motion (other than an appeal) in the first place. As for speaking in his own defense, he probably can't do that either, not because the chair can refuse to recognize people, but because that, too, was not germane to the pending motion. He should instead raise a point of order to the chair's behavior, and appeal (which will obviously be necessary). He could also move to declare the chair vacant if the chair is not going to preside in an impartial manner, or bring disciplinary action for behavior during a meeting, as discussed in RONR. 

I didn't get the impression the insulted party was a member of the committee that was meeting.

[Joshua Katz]

51 minutes ago, George Mervosh said:

I didn't get the impression the insulted party was a member of the committee that was meeting.

Hmm, didn't catch that. 

[Guest Gary]

My prior response to your answers did not post. Allow me to clarify please. The committee has a responsibility to advise Town Meetings on all warrant articles. The citizen is an appointed member of another commitee that submitted the warant article being discussed, prior to the committee meeting motion to support or oppose the warrant articel. The committee chair person insulted and judged the citizen using fasle information, refused to allow the citizen to defend himself with the facts involved. The chair person refered to prior committee statements on the same warrant articel  The committee chairman threatened to shut down further discussion and/or vote on the warrant articel if the citizen attempted any further discussion to defend himself. What sections of RRON would you suggest I refer to on this? Thank you. Gary 

[Atul Kapur]

Perhaps you're looking in the wrong place. Instead of RONR, you may be better off consulting a lawyer and the relevant laws around slander.

[Guest Gary]

Mr. Kapur I am not interested in litigation.  RRON sest parliementary procedure at all public meetings (except Town Meeting which is Town Meeting Times). I seek guidance on RONR (sorry I got that wrong earlier)  parliamentary procedure on this subject. Thanks, Gary  

[Atul Kapur]

Assuming that there is no superior document that gives non-members the right of participation, a non-member does not have the right to speak to the committee or even to attend the committee meeting. RONR has rules around decorum but those rules need to be enforced by the chair of the committee or a member of the committee.

[Joshua Katz]

It all remains the same - these are breaches of decorum, and should be dealt with by raising a point of order and appealing if necessary. However, if the citizen is not a member of the committee, then he can't raise the point of order - a member will need to. Similarly, he has no right to speak unless the committee allows him to, if he is not a member of the committee. 

[Guest Gary]

Mr. Kapur I will clarify. This was a publicly notified public meeting attended by the public in a public building. This is how government functions. Our by laws state that commttee public meetings will follow RONR.   Therefore I am seeking reference within RONR to provide as informational to both resolve what took place and prevent it from happening again.    

[George Mervosh]

12 minutes ago, Guest Gary said:

Mr. Kapur I will clarify. This was a publicly notified public meeting attended by the public in a public building. This is how government functions. Our by laws state that commttee public meetings will follow RONR.   Therefore I am seeking reference within RONR to provide as informational to both resolve what took place and prevent it from happening again.    

The only way to resolve what took place and prevent it from happening again, according to RONR is to report the matter to the superior body, which one would guess is the Town, and let the Town handle the matter since you haven't indicated other committee members are even willing to raise a point of order. 

"A standing or special committee may protect itself against breaches of order by its members during committee meetings, and against annoyance by nonmembers, by employing the procedures outlined on pages 645–49, but the committee, instead of itself imposing any penalty on a disorderly member, can only report such behavior to the committee's parent body, which may then take such action as it deems advisable."  RONR (11th ed.), p. 501

Your second and third sentences are why Dr. Kapur suggested contacting (presumably the Town's) legal counsel.

Edited April 29, 2019 at 05:43 PM by George Mervosh

[Guest Gary]

So, if I am correct the points are 1)these are breaches of decorum.  2) the committee should address it 3) If not addressed by the committ it can be taken to the committees appointing autrhority. 4) Town Counsel may be a source for advice. Do I haev this right? Thank you. Gary    

[George Mervosh]

59 minutes ago, Guest Gary said:

So, if I am correct the points are 1)these are breaches of decorum.  2) the committee should address it 3) If not addressed by the committ it can be taken to the committees appointing autrhority. 4) Town Counsel may be a source for advice. Do I haev this right? Thank you. Gary    

I'll take your word for it that it was a breach of decorum and the committee members may raise a point of order if something like this happens again and they feel it is a breach,, but I wouldn't do anything else beyond that without checking with the town's legal counsel.

[Joshua Katz]

Seconding Mr. Mervosh's point, in my time in town government we found things that we could not prohibit or regulate, no matter how absurd. The one that stands out to me is when we attempted to adopt a rule that, at public hearings, comments and questions had to be relevant to the question at hand, and learned that we needed to permit cross-examination on irrelevant topics at our public hearings. 

[Guest Gary]

 

Mr. Katz and Mr. Mervosh I very much appreciate your comments. Every meeting Chair has authority and responsibility to make respectful effort to keep debate on the topic at hand for the sake of time and result. Most agree it is disrespectful and ineffective to for someone to take discussion off the topic at hand.  

In the case I described the topic had not changed. The meeting Chair took the topic to personal judgement and accusation against a rightful participant in the debate who produced factual arguments which opposed  the topic result which the Chair sought to achieve. Then shut down any response.

That’s not how it works in America. Unless I am mistaken, that’s not how it works in RONR.  Do you agree?    

 

[Josh Martin]

1 hour ago, Guest Gary said:

Unless I am mistaken, that’s not how it works in RONR.  Do you agree?    

Well, technically, what RONR says on this subject is this:

”When a question is pending, a member can condemn the nature or likely consequences of the proposed measure in strong terms, but he must avoid personalities, and under no circumstances can he attack or question the motives of another member. The measure, not the member, is the subject of debate.” (RONR, 11th ed., pg. 392)

Generally, when RONR uses the term “member,” it refers to members of the assembly. In this instance, however, I think it could be reasonably argued that it refers to a member of the society. Therefore, since the subject of the attack was “an appointed member of another commitee,” it seems reasonable to conclude that the attack on this person was a violation of decorum.

In addition, it seems to me that as has been suggested previously, such comments are still not in order on the grounds that they are (generally) not germane to the pending question.

“In debate a member's remarks must be germane to the question before the assembly—that is, his statements must have bearing on whether the immediately pending motion should be adopted (see also Principles Governing the Debatability of Motions, pp. 396–99).” (RONR, 11th ed., pg. 392)

Personal comments regarding another person, whether those comments are positive or negative and whether or not that person is a member of the assembly (or of the society), generally have no bearing on whether the immediately pending motion should be adopted. The chair could have argued against the member’s arguments, but not against the member’s character.

As noted above, however, during a meeting of a committee, only a member of the committee has the right to raise a Point of Order or Appeal. If the committee is not willing to address these matters itself, they should be reported to the committee’s parent assembly.

Edited April 30, 2019 at 01:17 PM by Josh Martin

[Guest Gary]

 

Thank you Mr. Martin. Very well explained and helpful. But one clarification please.

This is about our Town Finance Committee which is a state mandated advisor to the Town Meeting legislature, the society. It happens that Town Meeting appointed this Finance Committee member, later elected by the Finance Committee to be Chair Person, which changes every few years.  

The meeting was about Finance Committee votes to advise the forth coming Town Meeting Legislature of Finance Committee support or not to support Town Meeting Warrant Articles.

The personal comments by the Finance Committee Chairman were directed at a member of the Towns Government Study Committee, who is appointed by the Select Board. The Government Study Committee submitted the Town Meeting Warrant Article, and was asked by the Finance Committee Chair Person to come forward and speak on the Town Meeting Warrant Article.

With all of this in mind, could the Government Study Committee member have raised a point of order to seek opportunity to defend themselves from personal attack made by the Finance Committee Chair Person who is openly opposed the Town Meeting Warrant Article?

Thank you.  Gary

 

 

[Joshua Katz]

22 minutes ago, Guest Gary said:

With all of this in mind, could the Government Study Committee member have raised a point of order to seek opportunity to defend themselves from personal attack made by the Finance Committee Chair Person who is openly opposed the Town Meeting Warrant Article?

 

Without tracking through all the organizational details, the rule is quite simple: only a member of the body that is meeting may raise a point of order. If the Finance Committee is meeting, and the person is not a member, then he may not raise a point of order. Any member of the Finance Committee may, however.

[Josh Martin]

7 hours ago, Guest Gary said:

With all of this in mind, could the Government Study Committee member have raised a point of order to seek opportunity to defend themselves from personal attack made by the Finance Committee Chair Person who is openly opposed the Town Meeting Warrant Article?

None of this additional information changes the fact that only members of the Finance Committee have the right to raise a Point of Order (or to make any other motion) at a meeting of the Finance Committee.

I should additionally note that a Point of Order does not give anyone an opportunity to defend themselves from personal attack, in the sense that the person would speak in his defense regarding the substance of the attacks. The purpose of a Point of Order in this regard is to make clear that the attacks are not in order, to stop the attacks, and to attempt to prevent such attacks from being made in the future. There is a different motion if it is desired for the subject of the attacks to speak in his defense concerning the substance of the attacks, which could be made instead of or in addition to the Point of Order. Specifically, this is a question of personal privilege. If a motion is pending, Raise a Question of Privilege is the proper method to introduce a question of privilege. It may still only be made by a member of the Finance Committee.

“Questions of personal privilege—which seldom arise in ordinary societies and even more rarely justify interruption of pending business—may relate, for example, to an incorrect record of a member's participation in a meeting contained in minutes approved in his absence, or to charges circulated against a member's character.” (RONR, 11th ed., pg. 227)

Edited April 30, 2019 at 10:09 PM by Josh Martin