Scottsdale City Council comes to terms with new rules, procedures
By Terrance Thornton | Digital Free Press
The demeanor, relationship and synergy of any local governing body can sometimes shift the outcome of public hearings and some atop Scottsdale City Council are looking to define better some of the nuances of how meetings unfold at City Hall, 3939 N. Drinkwater Blvd.
Led by City Attorney Sherry Scott and City Clerk Ben Lane, the final work session discussion prior to summer break for members of City Council was a detailed conversation regarding process and procedures.
Scottsdale City Council is expected be back in session this September.
“For some reason, we didn’t have formal rules and procedures adopted until September 2011,” Ms. Scott prefaced her presentation to the City Council in late July at City Hall. “In the Charter are where the rules and procedures for City Council are found, but up until then we had been using Robert’s Rules of Order, but that isn’t really designed for public bodies.”
In all, Scottsdale City Council evaluated more than 20 specific rules and procedures running the gamut of municipal operations as an elected leader of “The West’s Most Western Town.”
One of the first points of order discussed was the role of “parliamentarian” and who atop the local dais can engage with the ultimate legal authority of guidance during or before a public hearing. The Scottsdale parliamentarian? Ms. Scott serves in the role as city attorney, according the municipal Charter, which serves as the local constitution of Scottsdale.
Rule 4.3 a part of City Council procedures will be modified to allow any member of City Council to engage with the parliamentarian as legal questions arise prior or during public hearings.
“We have never officially enforced these rules at least not that I can recall,” Ms. Scott said of the rules-and-procedures exercise. “However, I agree they can be simplified. It is all a matter of what the council wants to decide what the rules will be.”
In terms of point of order discussions prior to meetings, up until last month, rested solely with the “presiding officer,” in this case Mayor David Ortega, and parliamentarian.
“Typically, the presiding officer and with the parliamentarian should be discussing the point of order, but I do try to respond to questions directed to me,” Ms. Scott explained but ultimately the rule is due to be modified as City Council reconvenes next month.
Mayor Ortega provided perspectives on the ideas around civil dialogue and offered a change in procedural language when applicants or speakers are addressing the governing body.
“I will genuinely listen and be held accountable for my worlds and actions,” he said of the aspirational pursuit of civil dialogue. “I like the term ‘response.’ I don’t really like the term ‘rebuttal.’ It is not listed as ‘rebuttal’ to the public.”
Scottsdale City Council point of order
A point of order item spurring comment from members of City Council was when and how council comments can be delivered during a public discussion while a motion is on the floor.
“I know there has been some discussion of using the queing equipment,” Ms. Scott said of formal City Council deliberation.
Scottsdale Councilwoman Tammy Caputi expressed disappointment with how some discussions are cut short.
“I don’t know what has to happen to make sure everyone is heard who has something to say,” she said. “I think that happens quite often.”
Mayor Ortega responded assuring Councilwoman Caputi and all other member of the governing body there is no malice in his actions.
“From time to time I do not call on everyone to speak,” he explained. “If someone buzzes in repeatedly and if they have already spoken, I do try to run the meetings in that way.”
Councilwoman Caputi disagrees and asked a modification be considered.
“I think we should all be set to the que,” she said. “As long as someone wants to speak even though someone says that’s the final comment … There is no rule unless we say so, ‘that we hear all qued speakers.’ We are saying you should have to que to speak on a subject. We are suggesting a new rule.”
Scottsdale Councilwoman Linda Milhaven echoed Ms. Caputi’s comments.
“I don’t see any purpose in it. I don’t even know what button to push. Is this it?” Mayor Ortega quipped, but agreeing to the procedural change.
Rules 10.6 and 10.8 are set to be modified to require the presiding officer of City Council meetings to also electronically que when wanting to speak on an item.
“We are not hitting every rule just the rules that got attention,” Ms. Scott said leading into a discussion around how motions and votes will unfold atop the dais.
“It seems to me the way we have it is the best way, but I probably could be convinced otherwise,” said Scottsdale Councilman Tom Durham, offering he believes the order of things ought to be last in, first out.
What that translates to is embodied in section 11 of City Council rules and procedures. For example, an alternate motion would be voted on first, amended motion voted on second, and main motion voted on third.
Scottsdale City Council also came to agreement there will only be three alternate motions allowed.
Public comment, continuance & ex-officio
As Mr. Lane provided input on the breadth of procedural options, call to the public offered a glimpse into prior practices at City Hall.
“Call to the public is three minutes and the way this has been handled by the City Clerk’s Office, is this is limited to residents of Scottsdale,” he said pointing out the public, in-house rule came about to ensure integrity of community feedback.
“It is that way in practice, on the website, but it is not in the rule,” he explained. “There has been times in city history when all 10 slots have been speakers who were not Scottsdale residents”
In response, City Council offered this suggestion, “Where applicable throughout the rules, change the word ‘citizens’ to ‘speakers.’”
In addition, all members of Scottsdale City Council agreed the surprise continuance acceptance at City Hall is not fair to residents of the community.
Found a part of the rule 9.2, City Council will now require:
- Rule 9.2 – modify to require applicant to provide notification of continuance request at least two business days prior to the Council meeting date so the agenda can be amended to provide notice to the public. Additionally, if the applicant did not provide notification by the required date, they could still seek a continuance, but it would not be as a matter of right and the public could comment on the continuance request.
Another modification sparking conversation among elected leaders was the role of ex-officio and if those guidelines ought to follow the adopted City Charter, the local constitution of the city of Scottsdale.
“I think it defeats the purpose for any member of City Council or especially the mayor to be sitting on the dais,” said Councilwoman Caputi. “It changes the dynamic and the decision-making process is being disrupted. It absolutely disrupts the boards and commissions.”
The issue? Mayor Ortega is an ardent attendee of city commission meetings and Councilwoman Caputi worries his presence could impact decisions. Meanwhile Mayor Ortega pointed to the “shall act as” ex-officio language a part of the City Charter for the person serving as mayor.
In March 2012 Scottsdale voters elected to remove the language a part of the Charter allowing the mayor and city manager to serve as ex-officio in any municipal board and commission, according to assistant city manger Brent Stockwell.
Scottsdale City Council appeared to agree to making the ex-officio rules consistent with the Scottsdale City Charter.
Scottsdale City Council consensus:
- Rule 4.3 – modify the rule to include “any Councilmember be allowed to consult with Parliamentarian.”
- Rule 10.2 – include existing Civil Dialogue language directly into the rules, either separately or in a preamble.
- Rules 10.6 and 10.8 – include language that Councilmembers and the Presiding Officer shall use queuing equipment when desiring to speak on an item.
- Rules 10.3, 10.9, and 10.12 – keep rules as currently constructed.
- Section 11, and definitions related to motions – remove the word “substitute” and use the word “alternate.”
- Rule 11.13 – a motion to continue has priority and all other motions are “last in, first out.”
- Section 11, Voting and Motions – there shall be no more than three active motions on the table at one time.
- Section 11, Voting and Motions – the general order of motions shall be last in, first out, for example, an alternate motion would be voted on first, amended motion voted on second, and main motion voted on third.
- Rule 5.3 – modify rule to reflect meetings held twice a month at 5:00 p.m. on Tuesdays, as feasible.
- Rule 5.6 – keep rule as currently constructed.
- Rule 6.11 – modify rule to require items to be agendized ahead of the meeting, which would allow for some limited debate; and allow Council additional options like a report from the Charter Officer or taking no action.
- Rule 6.12 – keep rule as currently constructed.
- Rule 7.1 – modify rule to limit non-agendized public comment to Scottsdale residents,
- Scottsdale business owners, or Scottsdale property owners. Additionally, note that non-agendized public comment must be on a matter within the City Council’s jurisdiction and cannot be electioneering.
- Rule 7.3 – keep rule as currently constructed, but clarify that public comment is not allowed on Mayor and Council items.
- Rule 9.1 – modify rule to allow for public comment after applicant’s presentation, but prior to Council questions.
- Rule 9.1 – modify rule to allow for Council questions after staff presentation and again after applicant presentation.
- Rule 9.2 – modify to require applicant to provide notification of continuance request at least two business days prior to the Council meeting date so the agenda can be amended to provide notice to the public. Additionally, if the applicant did not provide notification by the required date, they could still seek a continuance, but it would not be as a matter of right and the public could comment on the continuance request.
- Rule 15.9 – keep rule as currently constructed.
- Rule 16.1 – remove the rule.
- Rule 16.3 – adopt entire nomination, interview, and appointment process in Council
- Rules.
- Rule 16.4 – include proposed rule in the Boards and Commissions ordinance. However, modify the text of the rule to create an exception that electronic devices can be used in Executive Session to review applicable meeting materials.
- Include proposed rule to publish on all agendas, a provision to allow for possible executive session to obtain advice on any item on the agenda.
- Adopt a rule to discuss substantive amendments made from the dais on ordinances by recessing into executive session for advice or continuing item to a future meeting to allow for staff to research the substantive amendment.
- Adopt a rule to allow speakers to sign up for public comment on an item as long as the public comment period for that item is open.
Scottsdale City Council suggestions:
- Rule 10.3 – include an exception to allow for interruptions on points of order.
- Rule 10.9 and 10.12 – for consistency, include an exception to allow for interruptions on points of order.
- Where applicable throughout the Rules, change the word “citizens” to “speakers.”
- For sections related to public comment, add that time limit can be “up to” three minutes.
