Following Alice Down the Rabbit Hole

Following Alice Down the Rabbit Hole
(Guest Blog)

You know folks, last night’s show at the Planning Commission really wasn’t much when you think about it. It was so flawed that what the Zoning Committee does or doesn’t do really is of no consequence. The Board of Supervisors should be embarrassed, just as the honest folks on the Planning Commission and county staff appeared to be last night.

While I do not profess to be a parliamentarian, when read in plain English, Robert’s Rules seem pretty clear to me.

First, there is Article IV, Section 21. Incidental Motions. In the second paragraph it reads “The question of order must be raised at the time the breach of order occurs, so that after a motion has been discussed it is too late to raise the question as to whether it was in order or for the chair to rule the motion out of order. The only exception is where the motion is in violation of the laws, or the constitution, by-laws, or standing rules of the organization, or of the fundamental principles of parliamentary principles, so that if adopted it would be null and void. This is called raising a question, or point, or order, because the member in effect puts to the chair, whose duty it is to enforce order, the question as to whether there is not now a breach of order.” Don’t think that happened! What was Ms. Donato thinking? Is there such a thing as a retroactive "point of order?” I don't think so.

Second, there is Article VI, Section 40. Dilatory, Absurd or Frivolous Motions. The very nature of this potion of Roberts’ Rules is to protect the parliamentary process from continued renewal of issues like the floodplain ordinance.

Third, there is Article VIII, Section 46. Voting. Paragraph 9 reads “A member has the right to change his vote up to the time the vote is finally announced. After that, he can make the change only by permission of the assembly, which may be given by general consent; that is, by no member’s objecting when the chair inquires if any one objects. If objection is made, a motion may be made to grant the permission, which motion is undebatable.” Nothing like what is suggested above occurred during last evening’s show. Also please note that the chair may entertain the motion. The word “may” is permissive not mandatory.

And lastly, the so called "vote" on a matter of great importance was manipulated without notice to the public. Duh!

Poor Ms. Donato was duped into her action. It is ironic that some of the best friends she could have in pursuit of good things for this county were right in front of her, sitting in the audience, and she chose to slap them in the face. It is too bad she fell for the nonsense her disreputable colleagues fed her, embarrassing herself as well as those honest and capable folks on the Planning Commission and county staff, who were not participating in this ruse.

Let the Zoning Committee meet their little hearts out, whenever and wherever they want. If you give them enough time, they may even be able to get it right. If I understand correctly, it took three years for them to produce the first floodplain ordinance abortion. If the same monkeys bang on word processors for an infinite amount of time, eventually they will produce another work of fiction to waste more of the county’s time. PCW has already wasted enough time on this silliness. Let the monkeys play with themselves, as it were.

Time to move on to things that matter!

(This is A Guest Blog by An Anonymous Page County Watch Blogger)
If you would like your Guest Blog to show up here, email Research@PageCountyWatch.org OR hit the comments button and say your piece.