THE PUBLIC MIND: SCOTT CITY COUNCILMAN REBUTS RESEARCH OF CITY'S CODES

To the Editor:

After having read the article in your column pertaining to the procedures of the Scott City Council meeting, I have a rebuttal to the research of the city codes Sections 135.100 and 135.120 done by councilwoman, Brenda Moyers. I, therefore, would like to print the exact wording of the codes she referred to in her article September 26, 1991 for the citizens of Scott City.

SECT~ION 1~35.090: RULES OF ORDER

Except as otherwise provided by law or ordinance, the proceedings of the City Council shall be controlled by Robert's Rules of Order, as revised.

SECTION 135.100. DECORUM

The Presiding Officer of the City Council shall preserve decorum and shall decide all questions of order subject to appeal to the City Council. Any member may appeal to the Council from a ruling of the Presiding Officer upon a ~que~stion of or~der. If the motion for an appeal is seconded, the member making the appeal may briefly state his reason for the same and the Presiding Officer may~ briefly express his ruling, but there shall be no debate on the appeal ~and no other member shall participate in the discussion. The Presiding Officer shall then put the question to vote as to whether the decision of the chair shall be sustained. If a majority of the members present vote "aye," the ruling of the chair is sustained; otherwise, it is overruled.To my knowledge, the councilwoman is using this section as an exception to following the orders of the day, when indeed this section pertains to ~~parliamentary points of order."

A point of order or (question of order) would be, for example, a member rising to question the presiding officer's decision on a parliamentary matter such as the vote required on a motion, breaching the rules of Roberts Rules of Order, etc., not orders of the day (or rules of order).

I, for one, will admit that I was unfamiliar with questions of order and indeed had to seek advice from a person I felt was knowledgeable on this subject matter; however, I do know what decorum means and knew that this couldn't possibly be an "exception to Section 135.090 Rules of Order."

SECTION 135.120: CONSIDER ITEMS OUT OF ORDER

Any business may be called up out of the regular order by the consent of a m~ajority of the members present.

This section is an "exception" to following the orders of the day, but as stated in Robert's Rules of Order, Section 25 "Suspend the Rules," a motion must be made (by a council member and not the Presiding Officer) and seconded and usually requires a two-thirds vote. It can not be implied that there is no objection to not following the orders of the day simply because there was no objection by the members.

The councilwoman needs to not only read the two sections on decorum and considering items out of order more carefully, but also to read Robert's Rules of Order more carefully so she will not be further misguided in her interpretation of the city ordinances.

Enough has been said about Robert's Rules of Order and parliamentary procedures! This discussion about parliamentary procedures is being used to shift the attention from the real problem, the failure to allow the house numbering committee to complete and report its work.

The only intention the newly formed house numbering committee (of which I am chairman) has, is to carry out the task of checking the entire town for discrepancies of numerous complaints that were heard from residents at the Aug. 5 council meeting.

I challenge Brenda Moyers, the rest of the council, the mayor, and anyone else that finds discrepancies with the newly formed committee finishing the task they were formed to do, to watch the videos of the last three council meetings, and then state who may have been "out of order."

I, too, agree that we as the council can not please everyone; but I was elected to represent the people. I feel like that is what I have been doing, and what I will continue to do. I feel that if the citizens are dissatisfied with their representation in the council, it is truly their right to voice their opinions.

Ron Oller

Councilman Ward III

Scott City