ITEM 9-A
City Council Meeting 11-9-99 Santa Monica, California
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: City Staff
SUBJECT: Revised Resolution Amending the Rules of Order and Procedures for the Conduct of City Council Meetings
Introduction
At its meeting of October 26, 1999, the City Council heard public testimony and briefly considered a proposed resolution amending the Council
=s rules of order. After considering the resolution, the Council discussed additional revisions, noted that further revisions might be specified once individual Councilmembers had more time to review the proposal, and directed staff to return with a revised resolution. The attached resolution fulfills that directive.Discussion
The proposal which Council considered on October 26th included a number of amendments to the Council
=s present rules. Those amendments are summarized and listed in the original staff report which is attached. Additionally, a number of additional revisions were suggested in the course of the Council=s deliberation. Most of them have been incorporated into the revised, proposed resolution which is attached. The revisions incorporated into this new version of the proposed rules are listed below by rule number.Proposed Rule 3, entitled
AQuorum,@ has been revised to specify that except as otherwise established by law, the Council shall act by majority vote of those present (rather than by majority of the full body).Proposed Rule 5, entitled
AAgenda,@ has been revised to indicate that Councilmembers should (rather than must) submit additions to the Agenda by 3:00 p.m. on the Thursday preceding the Tuesday meeting and that submissions after this time may not appear on the Agenda. Additionally, the language governing written requests from the public has been revised to provide that staff must give Councilmembers copies of any letters which are not agendized but which are, instead, referred to staff or boards or commissions.Proposed Rule 6, governing the order of business, has been revised in three ways. The first sentence has been changed to specify that the order of business may be changed by majority vote of those present. Additionally, the wording of subsection 6(l) has been changed to clarify that most resolutions will be considered on the consent calendar. Finally, subsection 6(p), which presently governs reordering business, has been eliminated as unnecessary given that the provision for reordering business is now at the beginning of the rule.
Proposed Rule 10, specifying the powers of the presiding officer, has been revised to establish that the presiding officer
=s ruling on a point of order may be overturned by a two-third=s vote of the Councilmembers present.Proposed Rule 12, setting forth the rules of debate, has been changed. The language of subsection (f) has been reworded to clarify that the Councilmember introducing a matter has the privilege of speaking last, but not the privilege of deciding when to end debate. Also, subsection (i), on limiting debate, has been changed to establish that debate may be limited by a two-thirds vote of those present taken prior to the deliberation.
Rule 14(f) governing testimony by applicants and appellants has been reworded for the sake of clarity.
A few suggestions made by Councilmembers are not included in this revised, proposed resolution. It was suggested that the rules explicitly prohibit public comment on ceremonial matters, such as proclamations. This change has not been made because staff recommends against specifically prohibiting public comment on any agendized item, except second readings of ordinances. It was also suggested that the rules include specifications as to the manner of selecting inspirational presentations. While the Council may wish to adopt a policy or give staff direction, the selection process does not relate directly to the conduct of meetings. Therefore, no change was made. Finally, a limit was suggested on either the amount of time or the number of items on which a particular member of the public may speak. If Council wishes to impose such a limit, staff suggests a limit on total speaking time. Staff will propose language at the meeting if the Council wishes to make that change.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Council adopt the attached resolution.
PREPARED BY: Marsha Jones Moutrie, City Attorney
Attachments:
Staff Report dated October 26, 1999
Resolution