Regarding last meeting:

“I believe President Mazzeo is doing the best of her abilities. However, she and Vice President Connell did lose control of the meeting [on Feb. 11]. I trust that President Mazzeo and Vice President Connell will improve. These leadership roles on the council do have important functions for procedure and administering a high-quality meeting. That is the reason I nominated Councilor Lothrop to be president. Council president is not an easy role and it is very helpful to have someone with engrained institutional knowledge, a firm handle on procedure and an ability to think on one’s feet. While you may be interested mostly in the ‘charter objection’ portion of the meeting, there were several instances in this and previous meetings where errors were made on certain procedures. While this is not something that most residents or viewers may notice, in a certain circumstance, this type of mistake can leave a council vote open to legal challenge. Again, I trust the president and vice president will improve.”

“The move to change council rules and allow conversation after a motion to refer makes very little sense at face value. If you listen to President Mazzeo’s argument, she is attempting to solve a problem that simply doesn’t exist. If the council would like to hear from individuals who can provide helpful information on a topic before the petition is referred to subcommittee, we can simply hold off on the motion to refer. Short presentations take place, some questions are asked, and then the motion to refer is made. It is the responsibility of the president to guide the council through this very simple process. This common-sense solution has been utilized time and time again over the years without any trouble or controversy. However, what the proposed change would accomplish is a stronger ability to ram a proposal through council without vetting from the public (and the subcommittee). It is very easy to imagine a scenario where the mayor and those in his council majority lead a discussion that continues after the motion to refer is made. After some of the post-motion discussion, a number of councilors may suggest that they have heard enough and call for a vote on the issue rather than sending it to subcommittee. Remember, the mayor asked the council to approve the $1 million from the Pittsfield Economic Development Fund for the railcar manufacturer without any subcommittee recommendation or the inclusion of any parameters on the allocation from the fund. Without the protection of the council’s rule 38, one that mandates any proposed allocation from this fund be referred to the community and economic development subcommittee (among other mandates provided by the rule), the mayor may have been successful in pushing the $1 million through the council with no specific criteria attached. That’s just plain wrong and something we should take great pains to avoid for the sake of transparency and in the spirit of democracy.”

———————————–

THE PLANET also talked to a number of other people who have followed this debate with more than casual interest. They spoke off the record. Here is a sampling of those comments, taken from interviews conducted Z-Agents from THE PLANET’s Secret Squadron.

Z1 — “Chaos reigned at [the Feb. 11] meeting.  The president was unable to control the procedures.  Motions weren’t properly made in the correct order, roll call votes that were required didn’t occur (three ordinances required roll call votes and none were taken), and an amendment suggested by staff was never moved by a member of the city prior to calling a vote.  Maybe she’s hoping that with so many councilors having to ask for points of order that it will make them look petty and make her look the victim.”

Z2 — “During the recess Connell and Mazzeo asked the solicitor [Kathy Degnan] to give a ruling on whether or not the charter objection was valid.  As the solicitor was reading to them, and they heard the part that led them to believe it wasn’t valid, they stopped listening to her and started to converse between themselves. Connell said to Mazzeo something like, ‘So I’m just going to call a vote on this and let it stand.’  While this was going on, Clairmont pointed out to Degnan that she needed to keep reading.  Upon doing so, Degnan realized that the charter objection was valid.  Upon going back into session,  Connell called Degnan to the podium and asked her if the objection was valid.  In a round-about way she said yes.  However, Connell had already made up his mind that this was going to a vote, ignored the Degnan’s statements, and called for a vote.  Clairmont again had to object and tell Connell that Degnan said the objection stands. She agreed. Connell then asked for a vote to table, which wasn’t necessary as the objection automatically tabled the matter.  The vote was taken with some councilors voting not to table.  Councilor Lothrop had to interject and explain the process to Connell and Mazzeo.  What would they have done if the vote to table failed and Councilor Lothrop hadn’t stepped in?  At one point everyone was talking at once, including the City Solicitor.”

Z3 — “The irony for me is that Mazzeo wants to make a rule change but seems to have trouble managing under the rules that exist.  It’s going to get worse.”

Z4 — “There were so many procedural errors. Votes taken when they should not have been, votes not taken when they should have, and voice votes when the approval requires a roll call. All of that pales In comparison to when Mazzeo stepped down to try and change the rules to allow a matter to be debated before a referral to a standing committee.”

Z5 — “Connell took ‘The Big Chair’ and did not even understand the very basics of what was going on.  He did not know procedure. He could not follow Degnan’s opinion on the Charter Objection raised by Clairmont.  The Charter Objection’s purpose is to stop all debate. The point is that there is no option. Once a Charter Objection is allowed, all debate stops and no vote can be taken. Connell wanted to vote to table it, which is completely the opposite of what needs to happen. Taking a vote implies that there is an option to table or not to table. The Charter Objection leaves no such option.   Take your pick: was Connell befuddled or clueless.”

Z6 — “The best analogy I could come up with is imagine grading your students papers for grammar and punctuation, only to have the students be mad when you point out their error instead of taking the lesson of here’s how you do it right. It’s like the class elected the teacher from among their peers and the winner was a below average student who wanted everything “her way.”

———————————–

If this keeps up, city council meetings will rate right up there with The Blacklist, Scandal, and Dancing with the Stars.

———————————————————————————————-

“Is you is or is you ain’t my baby” — The Andrews Sisters with Bing Crosby.

“OPEN THE WINDOW, AUNT MILLIE.”

LOVE TO ALL.