1208 replies to this topic

[Mike K.]

It’s Haynes vs Atwell.

Wickson is just getting his name out. His views on the tent city in Saanich sealed his fate after he decried the decision to have the campers removed from Regina Park during an interview on CFAX.

[Rob Randall]

Documents obtained by the Saanich News appear to show that incumbent Saanich Mayor Richard Atwell has served as a director of the Capital Regional Municipal Amalgamation Society. This information appears to contradict claims that a lawyer representing Atwell has made in a cease-and-desist letter against his mayoral rival, Coun. Fred Haynes.

 

 

https://www.saanichn...un-fred-haynes/

 

Simple clerical error or sneaky business?

Edited by Rob Randall, 13 September 2018 - 09:38 AM.

[Wayne]

https://www.saanichn...un-fred-haynes/
 
Simple clerical error or sneaky business?

I see a tight race between Haynes and Atwell. Haynes has been working hard to get his name out there. But this document could prove interesting.

[Rob Randall]

Live:

 

Saanich all candidates meeting:

 

https://www.facebook...37585013105478/

[Wayne]

Live:

 

Saanich all candidates meeting:

 

https://www.facebook...37585013105478/

It was good to see all the candidates.  Not a fan of the format.

 

One question to one candidate and move on.

 

Would of liked to see a few pressing questions asked to half/or all, and hear the reply.

[Mystic-Pizza]

If I was in Saanich I would give Atwell my vote.

 

He's one tough SOB to go through what he did when he got elected and actually survive the FULL TERM.  

 

That, plus as a Mayor he's actually done an excellent job.

[Mystic-Pizza]

https://www.saanichn...un-fred-haynes/

 

Simple clerical error or sneaky business?

 

Sneaky business for sure.

[lanforod]

Between the two, I'm leaning more towards Atwell rather than Haynes. I won't decide until I see Atwell's platform though.

 

Haynes' platform is very weak on details, and includes some petty digs at Atwell and the United slate that are not necessary.

 

There is also a direct contradiction between them in regards to the slate - Haynes states that the slate is a majority voting bloc if they all get elected as his site states that the 5 votes are all that is needed to pass agenda and close debate. The United slate site states 6 out of 8 votes are required to close debate.

Which is correct?

[spanky123]

^ Didn't read all of the details but it looks like a majority of councillors can vote to close a debate so Haynes is right in this case.

 

http://www.saanich.c...edure_bylaw.pdf

Edited by spanky123, 22 September 2018 - 09:47 AM.

[VIResident]

^ Didn't read all of the details but it looks like a majority of councillors can vote to close a debate so Haynes is right in this case.

 

http://www.saanich.c...edure_bylaw.pdf

Under Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised when a motion for the previous question is made (whether formally or in a nonstandard form such as "calling the question", "close debate", or "calling for a vote" , a two-thirds vote (or unanimous consent) is required to end debate.

[Mike K.]

Thanks for that, and welcome to VV!

[Sparky]

Thanks for that tidbit of information VIR, and welcome as well. I love it when a new member comes bearing gifts.

[Nparker]

...when a motion for the previous question is made...a two-thirds vote (or unanimous consent) is required to end debate.

Except in the CoV when "someone" can simply say "that is not a discussion we are interested in having" and all dialogue is immediately stifled.

[spanky123]

Under Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised when a motion for the previous question is made (whether formally or in a nonstandard form such as "calling the question", "close debate", or "calling for a vote" , a two-thirds vote (or unanimous consent) is required to end debate.

 

So are you saying that the bylaw I linked to has been updated?

[VIResident]

So are you saying that the bylaw I linked to has been updated? 

Didn't read it.  Pointing out what Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised has to say about it.

[Rob Randall]

Very confusing to me. Any city's bylaws modify and expand upon the Robert's Rules base. I don't see anything in the Saanich bylaws regarding anything two-thirds. I may be wrong but any observing of municipal procedure I've seen has always been simple majorities. 

[VIResident]

Very confusing to me. Any city's bylaws modify and expand upon the Robert's Rules base. I don't see anything in the Saanich bylaws regarding anything two-thirds. I may be wrong but any observing of municipal procedure I've seen has always been simple majorities. 

Would the Clerks not rely on Robert’s Rules because no vote count is specified and will say it takes a 2/3rds vote? (I believe this is the case)

[spanky123]

Would the Clerks not rely on Robert’s Rules because no vote count is specified and will say it takes a 2/3rds vote? (I believe this is the case)

 

I would think that the clerks would rely on what the bylaw says. The bylaw pretty clearly states that a majority is 51% and there is no mention of any different voting procedure for closure.

[Rob Randall]

^That's what I assumed.

 

Two thirds of Saanich council is five (rounded down )

Half of council is four, unless one person is absent and then it's three and a half!

 

I assume it's like Victoria where the mayor is the tiebreaker.

[lanforod]

This seems very clear in the bylaws:

(b) In cases not provided for under this Bylaw, the 1999 edition of Webster’s New World Robert’s Rules of Order apply to the proceedings of Council, C/W and all committees of Council to the extent that those Rules are: (i) applicable in the circumstances, and; (ii) not inconsistent with provisions of this Bylaw or the Community Charter.

 

What is not clear is whether closing debate requires 2/3rds, or 50%+1. The 'in case of tie, the motion is defeated' bylaw seems to imply it is 50%+1.

 

This one also implies majority and seems to overrule all of the normal 2/3rds votes required in RRO (eg. closing debate is normally a 2/3rds vote: https://robertsrules...ror-05.htm#30):

Majority Decision unless Otherwise Required

45. Unless otherwise provided by statute or this Bylaw, a motion on a bylaw or resolution, or any other question before Council, is decided by a majority of the Council members present at the meeting, including the Mayor.

 

Note that as per RRO, it is 'at least' 2/3rds. Meaning you would round up, not down, making it 6 votes. However due to the bylaw 45, I don't think RRO's 2/3rds applies anywhere in Saanich Council procedings.

As per RRO, a majority means more than half. Which would be 5 (assuming all 8 are present).

 

Note, IANAL.

Edited by lanforod, 24 September 2018 - 07:27 AM.