On Thursday, I spoke to Alderwoman Sharon Davis about an article I'd written for that day's paper about the Board of Civil Authority's decision not to grant a hearing to two laid-off city employees, and the lawsuit an attorney for one of the employees promised would follow. Toward the end of the article, I touched briefly on an exchange at the start of the meeting in which Davis made a motion to compel Mayor Christopher Louras, the BCA's chairman, to recuse himself because she felt he had a conflict of interest as the maker of the budget that included the layoffs. That motion was denied by Louras, a decision which Davis and Alderman David Allaire then challenged. A vote on the challenge failed 4-5, with Louras casting a vote.
Both Davis and Louras were quoted in the article. Davis spoke about her objection to Louras' participation in the night's discussion because of the perceived conflict. On top of that, she said that, by voting and debating as the chairman, he had violated Robert's Rules of Order, a widely used guideline to parliamentary procedure that dictates how meetings of a variety of bodies should be conducted when they do not have their own rules that specifically outline those procedures. This last point did not make it into the article because I thought the explanation and an argument about Robert's Rules would become confusing.
When I asked Louras for his opinion (clearly labeled as such in the article) in response, he characterized Davis' opinion, as well as the attempt to remove him from the chair, as illustrative of an ignorance of and disregard for local and state rules. Although it didn't make it into the story, he also argued that nowhere in local or state government is there a conflict of interest ordinance that allows a body to remove one of its members from the board.
Davis described the quote, and my printing of it, as "inappropriate" and had this to say on Thursday and a follow-up conversation Sunday:
"At the start of the meeting, Chris read from a paper (the BCA) procedural guidelines that were developed during the Debra Bearrs hearing. What he read was that we were governed by Robert's Rules. If that's the case, then he presides but doesn't vote or debate," she said.
"The president doesn't vote or debate except to break a tie," she said. "It's not right and it's not fair that he did it."
But the convergence of Robert's Rules, the charter, which provides for the BCA, and the set of procedural guidelines the mayor read from at the start of the meeting is where things become murky for a board of 12 laypeople and a reporter. Unfortunately, because the city attorney was representing the city outside the rail Tuesday, the BCA was acting without one, Davis said.
It's written in the city's charter, that "the mayor shall preside and vote at all meetings of the Board of Civil Authority except as otherwise provided herein." Since in the introduction to Robert's Rules it states that their function is to guide boards on the subject of "common parliamentary law where it does not conflict with their own special rules," the charter's provisions for the BCA should prevail. When Louras said Tuesday night that the BCA was being governed by Robert's Rules, however, Davis said she believed that meant in all instances - including the participation of the chairman.
"I'm just disappointed with this whole administration and the way it handles things internally," Davis said.
Comments