voting on own ruling

[Guest Lyle]

During public speaking portion of city council meeting, one councilman yells Point of Order. Mayor (chair) told speaker he was violating the rules and your time is suspended. Another councilman appeals the decision of the chair and there is a second. Chair states why he suspended the time and asks for a vote which was 2 to 2. Chair voted to break the tie and suspended the time . Yes/No?

[hmtcastle]

During public speaking portion of city council meeting, one councilman yells Point of Order. Mayor (chair) told speaker he was violating the rules and your time is suspended. Another councilman appeals the decision of the chair and there is a second. Chair states why he suspended the time and asks for a vote which was 2 to 2. Chair voted to break the tie and suspended the time . Yes/No?

Yes. Though the tie vote already sustained the decision of the chair.

[Chris Harrison]

Yes (although the ruling would have been sustained with a tie vote as well). See RONR p. 393.

[Gary c Tesser]

That's yes on the appeals process. I'm not sold on the mayor's having the authority to suspend someone's time, and I'm squirming on how the mayor handled the point of order. But maybe Guest Lyle's succinct narration just left those details out.

[Chris Harrison]

That's yes on the appeals process. I'm not sold on the mayor's having the authority to suspend someone's time, and I'm squirming on how the mayor handled the point of order. But maybe Guest Lyle's succinct narration just left those details out.

I am not completely sure either about the right to suspend the member's time and RONR pp. 626-627 does seem to conflict itself somewhat. They say:

If the offense is more serious than in the case above - as when a member repeatedly questions the motives of other members whom he mentions by name, or persists in speaking on completely irrelevant matters in debate - the chair normally should first warn the member; but with or without such a warning, the chair or any other member can "call the member to order." If the chair does this, he says, "The member is out of order and will be seated." Another member making the call rises and, without waiting to be recognized, says, "Mr. President, I call the member to order," then resumes his seat. If the chair finds this point of order well taken, he declares the offender out of order and directs him to be seated, just as above. If the offender had the floor, then (irrespective of who originated the proceeding) the chair should clearly state the breach involved and put the question to the assembly: "Shall the member be allowed to continue speaking?"

On one hand it sounds like the Chair can order the speaker to be seated but then later in the same paragraph it is saying the Chair should put the question to the assembly.

[David A Foulkes]

I am not completely sure either about the right to suspend the member's time and RONR pp. 626-627 does seem to conflict itself somewhat. They say:

If the offense is more serious than in the case above - as when a member repeatedly questions the motives of other members whom he mentions by name, or persists in speaking on completely irrelevant matters in debate - the chair normally should first warn the member; but with or without such a warning, the chair or any other member can "call the member to order." If the chair does this, he says, "The member is out of order and will be seated." Another member making the call rises and, without waiting to be recognized, says, "Mr. President, I call the member to order," then resumes his seat. If the chair finds this point of order well taken, he declares the offender out of order and directs him to be seated, just as above. If the offender had the floor, then (irrespective of who originated the proceeding) the chair should clearly state the breach involved and put the question to the assembly: "Shall the member be allowed to continue speaking?"

On one hand it sounds like the Chair can order the speaker to be seated but then later in the same paragraph it is saying the Chair should put the question to the assembly.

I read that to mean that only if the offender also had the floor legitimately would the vote be called for. Otherwise, it's siddownanshuddup time.

[Rob Elsman]

During public speaking portion of city council meeting, one councilman yells Point of Order. Mayor (chair) told speaker he was violating the rules and your time is suspended. Another councilman appeals the decision of the chair and there is a second. Chair states why he suspended the time and asks for a vote which was 2 to 2. Chair voted to break the tie and suspended the time . Yes/No?

As others have already noted, a tie vote sustains the ruling of the chair. RONR (10th ed.), p. 250, ll. 9-13. If this council is a small body and the mayor is a full member of the council, he should plan to vote right along with the other members instead of waiting to the end to see if there is a tie.