Ken
O’Brien
On Tuesday I
poked a little fun at the prior night’s meeting of the Southbridge Town
Council.
The fact is, however, that over an hour of wasted
time as well as a vote to reconsider just before the close of the meeting could
have been avoided easily.
All that was required was a fundamental
understanding of the provisions of Robert’s Rules of Order as they apply to
points of order.
Here is the incident that led to this ignominious waste
of time and effort.
One of the key elements related to a point of order
is timeliness.
As stated in Robert’s Rules, “If a question of order
is to be raised, it must be raised promptly at the time the breach occurs.”
In this respect Councilor Moriarty’s point of order
was both proper and timely. Similarly, the Chairman’s ruling was correct.
The problem arose in regard to Councilor Manna’s
contention that everything was null and void because the same kind of breach of
order had been committed by Councilor Moriarty in subcommittee.
Her argument was invalid due to the requirement of
timeliness.
If she was going to object, then the time to do it
was when the breach of order occurred in subcommittee. Once that opportunity
had passed the violation became irrelevant.
The only exception to the timeliness rule is where
the violation is of a continuing nature. The specific conditions relating to
this exception were not met in this case. There are only five circumstances
under which the timeliness rule does not apply: when a main motion is adopted
that conflicts with the by-laws (unless the conflict is with a rule in the
nature of a rule of order); when a main motion is adopted that conflicts with a
previously adopted main motion (unless it is adopted by the vote required to
amend that motion); when an action is taken in violation of applicable
procedural rules prescribed by law; when an action is taken in violation of a
fundamental principle of parliamentary law; and when an action is taken in
violation of a rule protecting absentees or a basic right of an individual
member.
The proper invocation of this condition of
timeliness in response to Councilor Manna, either by another member or the Chairman, would have prevented a
significant waste of time.
The problem here is the three Bitches nikkolla manna and clemonce think they know everything on the council and the fact is they know nothing they are as ignorant barn yard pigs . why dont you old crotchity old hens get off council !! We need experience on that council bring back some of the experienced councilors and they know who they are.....
ReplyDelete