The following email was just sent to the city clerk, the law director, city council and the local media and others: Tuesday, April 15, 2014 Mr. Kachmar, Ms. Amana, Members of Council, I must raise the question of the propriety of allowing Mr. Bethea to change his abstention to a negative vote in the matter of going into closed session at the top of Tuesday night’s council meeting. With Councilwoman Holly-Ward absent and Mr. Bethea abstaining, the motion to amend the agenda and go into executive session received 3 votes in favor and 2 opposed. The clerk announced the result, the motion carried. At that point, Councilman Bethea asked for an explanation of why the motion carried. He then asked and was granted permission to change his vote from an abstention to a no vote. This changed the ANNOUNCED OUTCOME OF THE VOTE. It is my understanding that the governing body conducts its business by the rules of procedure outlined in the city code, section A316-2. Under that section, Rule 1 states: Except as may be provided in the Charter, questions of order, the organization and the conduct of business of the Council shall be governed by Roberts Rules of Order in all cases to which they are applicable, and in which they are not inconsistent with these rules. I have consulted my copy of Roberts Rules of Order and found that votes can only be changed prior to the announcement of the result. Clearly, Mr. Bethea requested and was allowed to change his abstention to a negative vote in order to alter the outcome of the vote. I respectfully request an explanation of how and why allowing this was proper procedure. Jim Carlucci
Posted on: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 01:24:19 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015