County Board - Regular Meeting

Yes, Christmas. All right, it looks like everyone knows how to read the clock except Mr. Brooks. Oh, I'm sorry. Good afternoon, everyone. We're going to get out of here quick enough. We'll have an we'll have a one:00 lunch. How's that sound? All right. I'd like to call the committee uh committee the whole meeting to order at 12:03 p.m. Can we all rise for the pledge of allegiance? And I would like to invite um Elaine Bottomly shaking her head no. Would you please lead us in the pledge?

To the flag of the United States of America, to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you, Elaine, and welcome back from vacation. Um before we take role, there was a request by one of our board members, El Costa, to be able to participate. There are no votes being taken today, so she would just like to join in and for the discussion. Um she's at work, so it's under our rules that she should be allowable with the permission of the committee members that are here. So is there a motion to allow? Motion by Traneer, second by Ogala. Any discussion? Can we have a roll call, please? I sure can. If I can find the right one. Use that one.

Richmond Williams. Dean Schlottman. Dean Schlottman Ogala pretzel pretzel. Yeah. Yeah. Can I stop real quick? I We're going to This is a yes or no vote in order to allow EL to participate and then we will do a roll. So Okay. Thank you.

Butler. Newquest Balich, Oxley, Oxley, Brooks, Winfrey, Bolic, Logan, Logan, Freeman, Revvice, Revis, Mitchell, Ortiz, Ortiz, Burkowick, Hickey, Costa, Trinire Bandine. Yes. Motion passes.

Motion carries. Thank you. Now, may we have a roll call? Okay. Richmond Williams Butler here. Brooks. Yeah. Winfrey. Bulock. Freeman.

Ortiz. Burquick. Hickey. Costa. Yes. Thank you everyone. Trir, yes. Vany, yes. You have a quorum here. No quest. Oh, sorry. No question. How many members do we have?

14. 14 members. We do have a quorum. Yep. All right. We have four uh sets of minutes to approve. So looking for a motion for the committee of the whole minutes on October 29th, 2024, previous

second Brooks. Any discussion on those minutes? All those in favor, please say I. Anyone opposed? Motion carries. Committee, the whole minutes 1210 24 approval. Any discussion? All those in favor, please say I. Anyone opposed? That motion will carry. Looking for a motion to approve the committee the whole minutes from May 9th, 2025. All those in favor, please say I. I. Anyone opposed? That motion will carry. And the last set of minutes, committee, the whole minutes, uh, May 14th, 2025 25. All those in favor, please say I. Anyone opposed? That motion will carry. Thank you. Is there any public comment for the agenda items only today? Any public comment? Seeing none, there is no old business listed here. Any old business to be presented? All right, moving on to new business. As a request by some of the board members, we did ask for committee the whole for um Robert's rules of order. So, I would like to invite our presenter th this afternoon, Mr. Matthew Peresca. Matt is the current city clerk, circuit clerk rather, in Kendall County. He's a registered parliamentarian with the National Association of Parliamentarians. He also served as a parliamentarian for

Niko. In addition, he was a member of the Kendall County Board for eight years. Thank you so much, Matthew, for your time and um looking forward to your presentation. And I believe we discussed earlier if there are questions if Tim you can just turn on all the mics and we can interrupt Mr. Pasca and stop him uh with questioning as as he goes along. Thank you sir. Thank you very much Mr. Speaker. Can everyone hear me? Okay. All right. Uh thank you very much for the kind introduction. Um I'm I am going to just briefly uh state one thing. So when I based on my time on the Kendall County Board, additionally I served as the county board speaker uh parliamentarian, my apologies, Mr. Speaker, uh county board parliamentarian and additionally served as chairman of the planning, building and zoning committee of Kendall County. So routinely we had public hearings and different issues that would arise that necessitated me to get very familiar with Robert's rules of order. Um first how many of you in the room would say you have a good familiarity with Robert's rules? Um does anyone and what information do you think you need? And this is one of those times where please feel free to push the button if you think you need anything in particular. I am curious beforehand.

I have Micah Freeman. Uh I don't I do not like doing this. Did I Did I not

Turn them Tim? Can you just turn them on? Thank you. Thank you, Matt, for being here. Um, so since you asked, I think that uh this board could um and myself could use more of the points of orders, um how to conduct ourselves, um when it's appropriate to interrupt and when it's not. Um time time restraints. Um and I think that about sums up my needs. Okay. Thank you. Anyone else have any?

Yeah, I I know enough to be dangerous, I think. And um for me, sometimes it's about what's proper for the chair of a committee in terms of allocating time and you know, refereeing between opposing viewpoints, that sort of thing. And I know Robert's Worlds does cover some of that, but I'm pretty not I'm not as knowledgeable about that as I am about some of the more basic points.

Okay. Anyone else? All right. Did you have All right. Moving on. So the first question I have for everyone in the room is what is a parliamentary authority? So beyond Robert's rules, what is your parliamentary authorities of what you go by here at the board, county board rules is one of them. State statutes would be another that Robert's rules of order is definitely the parliamentary procedure that. So when you're looking at parliamentary procedure, the bulk of what we are looking at comes in the following order. We pull from the state constitution or the US constitution. We pull from state statutes. We pull from your county board rules of order. And then anything that is left out is what we pull from the parliamentary procedure. Meaning that yes, Robert's rules may say something is allowed. But just because Robert's rule says something is allowed doesn't mean that under state law we can accomplish that same goal. Robert's rules. A quick example would be um under Robert's rules of order, you in theory can pull off anything that is tabled at any time. As we all know that under the Illinois Open Meetings Act, you have to give notice before there is any votes on anything. So that is one area where state law would come before Robert's rules. County Board rules of order also has different rules and I am not as familiar with the Will County rules but in Kendall we had different rules for debate that were in our rules of order. So that that took precedence over the Robert's rules of order. Additionally, there is several other different types of parliamentary procedures. I just brought these as a quick visual demonstration. We're not going to go

into them, but we have Canon's rules of order, the standard code of parliamentary procedure, which is actually pushed by the American Institute of Parliamentarians, and an old one, the meter's manual of parliamentary procedure. If anyone afterwards wants to thumb through them, I'll we'll leave these up here. Robert's rules, however, is used by about 90% of all groups and organizations. And if you could go next slide. Uh, Robert's rules of order was originally written by a brigadier general who came home and attended a a meeting and at the meeting became very disgusted with how the meeting was conducted and he thought there had to be a simpler and easier way to present the rules of order and have the meeting run. And so he wrote the rules of order and in 1876 he brought forward his first edition. We're currently on the 12th edition and it is called Robert's rules of order newly revised. And if you have an 11th edition book the big change from the 11th to the 12th edition is how to cut the conduct of electronic members. So electronic electronic meetings has been addressed in 12th edition. Um, Robert's rules, as I said, is the most commonly used parliamentary authority in the United States. It is used by county boards, nonprofits, school boards, etc. Um, the reason most groups will pick something slightly different like canons, standard code demeters, or even Mason's manual is Robert's rules originally is not made for government. Robert's rules is what we've adapted most government entities to use. It is the most familiar that everyone continues to use it, but

Robert's rules of order was never designed for the use in government. Um, that being said, it is still the most commonly used one. Of the 102 counties in Illinois, um, we did a survey back in 2016. Of the 102, uh, 76 use Robert's rules of order. only one uses Mason's manual of legislative procedure and the others their response was we don't need any rules of order and I guarantee Will County was not one of them

that being and it it does tell some of the boards that said they did not have a rules of procedure they were commission form counties they are three or five members it's easier for smaller boards to exist without a rules of procedure. Rules of procedure are really meant for larger groups. Um, and you have how many county board members here? We have 22.

22. That is not the largest county board in the state. So, there are counties that have significantly more board members and they have adop they adopt Robert's rules. The only county that uses Mason's manual is actually Tazwell County and I believe they are looking at changing and at the end of the conver at the end of this conversation I can touch on very briefly one or two of the differences but I want to really focus on Robert's rules. So next slide please. the first thing under Robert's rules of order to try to get and try to understand and I'm starting 101 and so if I I can move a move quicker through these but I still want to at least go for some people have never been exposed to this before and I know most of the people in this room have for Robert's rules of order the first thing is always the members and the presiding officer so for the purpose of this I am for synonymous terms presidenting officer officer, chair, speaker, I would all say are synonymous for the purpose of this conversation. Next slide, please. This is meant to Robert's rules is meant to be have more of a formality to proceedings. Um, and it's to maintain decorum, to preserve members rights, and to facilitate a smooth and orderly transaction of business. It is really not designed at all to impede business or to complicate the proceedings and to preserve members rights that is referenced to it is preserve the rights of m the minor the minority and permit the majority to govern on any given issue. And when I mean preserve the rights of minority it preserve the rights of the minority to be heard. It it's not an unlimited right to the minority to um make motions just to deliberately slow

things down. We will get to to that about a bit later on in the presentation um when we get to some of the more technical aspects of Robert's rules. If we could go next slide for patterns of formality um everything exists towards the chair. The chair is the center of the meeting and I've been in meetings where I am in a conver in a debate with another colleague and yes I do slip into talking to my colleague directly particularly if we are not in informal conversation informal consideration but the proper way to um during a debate is to refer to the presiding officer as Mr. Madam Speaker, or the chair and never use the chair's name or the pronoun you in that it's meant to kind of preserve the respect of the chair. This helps associate the individual with the position. And so instead of addressing um Mr. Speaker, if you permit, instead of saying Joe, I need more time on this or Mr. Van, it's Mr. Speaker, um Mr. Chairman, I need more time on the on this item. And that is to enhance the authority of the chair. to make sure we are disassociating the member with the position. Um so for example don't say how is that um for example as I said don't just say Mr. Chairman I need more time it's always or Joe I need more time it's Mr. speaker, I need more time. And if you are debating another member, never address them by their name. Uh so as my example, I like Lucy, how is that different than last time? Don't address another member directly. Address the address the chair. Mr. Speaker, I'd like to know how this project differs from the one we had four years ago. And the

reason you're addressing everything through the chair is during particularly formal debates. And at the county board, most of your debates are formal debates. It's not discussion unless you're an informal consideration. All communication should be done through the chair, not to the individual member. That prevents discussions from getting heated between individual members. Uh um member Freeman um So we're asking questions throughout correct speaker. Yeah. Okay. Um so

when we started this I said thank you Matt for being here. Should I have addressed you as Mr. Protesca? We are since this is a committee of the whole committee of the whole hearings are by the fact are by default informal consideration. If this was a meeting of the full board. Yes. And you should have said if it was a meeting of the full board, it should be Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank Mr. Pansa for being here today. Okay.

Since this is informal, this is a committee the whole it still should be um strictly speaking based Mr. Pasa, thank you for being here today, but I'd rather you guys just address me as Matt or Matthew for the purpose of this. Um, so we can have more of a frank conversation. So everything is directed to the chair. No matter what everything is, no matter what, even if I have a question to the person in the podium, correct? And even if it's staff, they would during a full board, we would have to we would should need to say like Mr. Ronaldson or Okay. And that is to keep keep up with parliamentary decorum. Thank you,

Mr. Brooks. I'll just call you what I call my grandchildren. Hey, you. Um, you said that there are 76 counties out of the 102 in state of Illinois that have adopted Robert Rule. Yes. You also mentioned that Kendall County um kind of for lack of a better term who will rank your rules over Roberts. It is always the Will County Board rules of order, right? Okay. The Kendall County Board rules of order always take precedent, okay,

over Robert's rules. Um, I have not seen your board rules of order, but if your board's rules of order are like my board's rules of order, when we adopted Robert's rules of order, it's says anything not covered in the rules of order that we have the board rules of order is covered under Robert's rules of order, the most current edition. What about Mr. Guzman here is our states attorney. All of our meetings and committees, there's a rep from states attorney's office. There's also on our agendas uh states attorney opinion on some of the committees.

Um I guess I'm looking for the the rank. If if the state's attorney, of course, you go by law, Mr. Guzman, as as I said early on in the presentation, state law takes precedence over Robert's rules of order. Okay? and state law takes precedence over the county board rules of order. Robert's rules is just filling in the gaps I gota of everything. All right. Thank you, Miss Miss Burkowitz,

Miss Newquist. Sorry, I That's okay. Uh Jackie is taking care of the the microphone. So, do you want to go first? Okay. It's just Thank you. It's just um hopefully a quick question. Um you mentioned informal consideration and that this was a committee of the whole so technically it's informal consideration. Whoops. I'll turn mine off.

Are are all committee meetings automatically informal consideration? But even then, you're saying people should always address the chair and not each other. If you could just clarify that. Thank you.

Um part of it depends on um what your county board rules of order say. Uh for example, if you are I'll use my planning, building, and zoning committee that is a was a five member committee. We only had a 10 member board. So, we had a five member committee and that committee would always be under formal consideration. Uh, we would vote to go informal consideration. Um, but Robert's rules of order, um, when it mentions a committee the whole, it mentions the committee the whole for informal consideration. And so my and our county board's stance has always been that since our board rules of order never said that committee the whole is under formal consideration, we just took the Robert's rules definition for informal consideration on the board agenda.

Member Burkowitz. Uh so if let's say it's a land use um and development committee or maybe even a full board meeting and a board member directs to the chair or the county executive in a full board meeting directs an inquiry regarding that item that they're addressing at that time. But the inquiry doesn't go further, doesn't get answered. Um, is there is there any way for the board members to persist to get that inquiry addressed

in term? What do you mean by inquiry? Well, if so, so sometimes uh let's say it's a um ordinance or or special application and a board member has a question. So, Robert's rules uh directs us to address the chair or the county executive with the question. Um, what if that question doesn't go to the um the applicant to be to be answered?

That wouldn't necessarily be a question for Robert's rules depending on how it was asked. If you're asking for uh if you're asking the chair or whoever is presiding for an information that requires followup, um you can by all means ask again in a subsequent meeting. But there is not for Robert. That sounds more like it could be a communication an internal communication as opposed to a parliamentary procedure issue. Does the chair or county executive have to repeat the question to the person who's doing the presentation that I would say is more of a legal issue as opposed to a parliamentary issue.

So a couple things just a couple question just want to make a clarification. And so when you talk about will county uh rules of order, we're just talking about bylaws. Yeah. A lot of people know them as bylaws. And then uh would there ever be a time where it would be proper for someone on a committee to direct somebody else on a staff to do something or should that be um directed to the chair and the chair would be the one to direct uh any staff or anything as a result of that request? that would go into a lot of internal and how you have your internal county set up um in terms of how you have determined by past practice and everything how you get information from staff. Strictly speaking according to Robert's rules of order all comments and conversations are directed to the chair. It could be past practice in other in other counties in or your your county, my county that the how you get information from staff can be directed by individual me members. Those determinations are made by the board which could be determined by past practice. So, if it's in the bylaws, that would supersede Robert's rules. But in the absence of the bylaws,

the rules are address the chair and the chair will take action. If the chair thinks it is appropriate, take action. Okay. Um, two more comments and then I'd like to see Mr. Pasca continue if we can. So, member Ogala and then member Ogala.

Thank you. So my my whole thing is with today with this virtual meeting we had we voted to allow somebody to attend virtually before we even did a roll call. If we look at our county board rules which is on page 2213-13.14 B if a a board member cannot attend in person due to business of the public body i.e. the county board personal illness or disability, employment purposes, a family or other emergency or unexpected child care. They may attend virtually only if a quorum is present in compliance with such and such. Just so you guys I think was wrong with the way it was handled today per our rules says that. Okay. I'm sorry. I

with the way we did I'm fine with having L do it, but we should have got a determine whether we had a quorum or not. And then it says if a quorum is present to allow it, I'm fine with L doing it because it's just a a presentation. So that that's that's a question I have. That was that was a simple mistake and I just I I I wanted L to be part if it was okay to be part of the roll call. So it was a mistake on my part. I don't know the rules by the back of my hand. I don't have access to them like you do right now. So I apologize. I'm just saying. So sometimes we do things and we're not act we're not 100%. We still accomplish the same goal in a in a decent quorum. We have a quorum with L. Yes.

Thank you. All right. Moving on. Mr. Caska. Thank you. So if I could go to the next slide, please.

All right. For patterns of formality for members, um it is best to avoid using other members names when they can be described in another way. And it's always important never to use what I call unparliamentary language when discussing a member's motives in debate. Never use words like lie, liar, fraud, fraudulent during a during a debate. That is you're all meant to be colleagues on this and those that language just inflames the situation. And actually, Robert's rules does have a section on our unparliamentary language. If we could go to the next slide. As I said before, it's always important to talk that the chair always speaks in the third person and refers to themsel as the chair. Um, and the chair should never refer to a member as you. It should be, for example, the chair recognizes Miss Smith or the chair recognizes uh the member from Joliet just to try to bring more formality into things. Next slide, please. So what does it mean to be recognized? Um like today uh the member's name is added to the list of those who wish to speak. Once the member has been recognized by the chair, it is that member's exclusive right to be heard at that time. Um the chair the chair when the person wishes to be recognized, the chair acknowledges the request and will decide when to grant it. and the the member may share the floor with others uh in an orderly debate. Meaning if you are debating an issue and you are and you have the floor and another member wishes to interject and ask a question during the debate, the correct phrase would be to get the attention of the chair and ask if the member would yield for a

question or if a member would yield in general on something if they have to jump in. Uh but if you yield for a question um I'll since I'm looking uh at the first two I see if Mr. Butler is speaking and during his initial time and Miss Burkowitz wants to jump in will Mr. Will the member yield for a question. Burkowit and if he agrees Miss Burkowitz can then ask his question and then you would be able to answer and move on. But once a member has the has the floor, it's their floor, especially during debate. And so we will touch more on debate a little bit later. But it is very much that the chair recognizes who has the floor. And then once the member has the floor, it is their theirs until their time has expired or they yield the floor back. So we're going to next go into the basic structures of a motion. If we can go to the next slide. When you're making a motion, you wait to be recognized by the chair. You make a motion. A number another member seconds your motion if a second is required. There are some motions that don't require seconds. Not everything does require a second. And I will touch on one of those briefly later that does not require a second. Um once a motion is made, shall this body approve the minutes of the last meeting? The chair will then take a a second to restate the motion and then opens discussion on the motion if it is debatable. And there is a list of motions that are debatable and not debatable and I can get that to everyone after this presentation. Um after the debate, the chair calls for a vote and then the chair announces the results. It is unless it is strictly

speaking required to be a roll call under uh state law. It is the chair's discretion on how a vote goes unless there is a clear division in the room. And members can ask for a division vote or a roll call vote. Next slide, please. So, quick question. Whose duty is it to make sure the motion is in the proper form? Anyone in the room? It is it is the chair's duty to make sure the motion is in the proper form for the record. Ideally, the maker of the motion should have say the motion in the proper form. However, and this is what I have seen uh for example is something that it personally grates at me when I've seen it in a meeting is the chair will say is there a motion to approve the minutes and somebody will say so moved strictly speaking what are you so moving to the approval of the minutes that could leave room for ambiguity so it is best practice to always say this is my motion. I move to approve the minutes of X date and then the next person would be second and then the chair would then say the motion is for the approval of the minutes for X date. Is there any discussion and the secretary can always ask for a clarification or the clerk can ask for a clarification of what has been said if it if they need it for the minutes. But the ultimate duty is for the chair to make sure everything is in the proper motion. And it acts as a check. Not only it serves to protect the chairman, it serves to protect the membership as well. That way you're hearing the motion

made multiple times, multiple ways to make sure what is actually being discussed is what you want to be discussed and everybody is in the room is understanding it the same way. So next slide. If a motion is made in second, can the chair chair rule the motion out of order? Yes, absolutely. The chair can rule a motion out of order even if it's been made and seconded. Give you an example. If somebody all of a sudden says, "I move to approve um measure X, Y, and Z." And measure X, Y, and Z is not on the agenda. that would violate Illinois opens meeting Illinois open meetings act chair would have to rule that out of order that is part of the chair's job to is to make sure the membership is only considering what is germanine and that includes the open meetings act that includes things that are under Robert's rules of order gerine or not gerine next slide please can the chair decide by his own preference which motions he will or will not allow. Yes or no? I see a lot of head shaking. No, I don't see anyone saying yes. So, next slide, please. The chair must state the question on a motion immediately after it has been made and seconded unless he is obliged to rule it out of order or unless in his opinion the wording is not clear. So if in the chair's opinion how you stated a motion is not clear, he can ask you to restate it. That's part of his job to make sure what is on the record is clear. Um,

next slide. One more. So, we'll get to the this next part. I think this motion can be improved. Amendments and everything else. So, one more slide if you could. If there is a mo a motion that you want to make better or you want to change because you disagree with it, you can move to amend it. It is helpful to limit amendments to striking and inserting new words instead of replacing entire motions with a new one. Um, that being said, it's helpful. That doesn't mean it is prohibited to strike an entire motion with a new one. However, and this is a big however, the chair can always rule something out of order if it changes the meaning of the underlying motion. Member Truner,

I just wanted to add that in our rules, which do supersede rules, we require that it be in writing. Yes. Yes. Robert's rules, too, requires it it be in writing and that always makes things easier if everything is in writing. Um, I prefer redline copies of things. That is my own personal preference though that is ultimately up to the chair to decide how he defines in writing. I've seen it where chair chairs have accepted something on loose leaf paper handwritten out striking out different words. It's up to the chair's discretion on that. But everything should should be in writing. We have confusion. Couple more questions before you continue.

All right. Uh Miss Freeman. So, is it okay to amend an amended amendment? Like, I'm I'm going to make a motion to amend, but I'm going to make a motion to Don't you have to deal with one at a time? So, you can amend an amendment. So, if you have a motion on the floor and you have an amendment on the floor, correct? You can amend make a motion to amend an amendment. However, that does not go on indefinitely. So, I can't amend the amended amendment. You cannot make a motion to an amend an amendment of an amendment. So you get one at a time. One one amendment you can at a time. You can go amendment and then you can amend an amendment. Okay.

But you can't go beyond that. So you can't just keep you can't have an infinite regress of amendments. Thank you. Member Hickeyi then member Bullet.

Thank you. With regard to um if a chair can decide if the amendment changes the original motion materially enough that it shouldn't be allowed. Could you give like an example of that? It could be. Um, so I'll say let's say the original motion is to give I'm just going to pick on a charity. Um, give $10,000 to the Boy Scouts of America. Um, and all of a sudden the amendment is they want to change the Boy Scouts of America to the Girl Scouts of America. Some people would it would be in my mind depending on what the under the gr if it was a grant what the grant is for yes that could be allowed. However, if you're all of a sudden saying th this particular item, this particular paral has been granted this zoning and then all of a sudden the motion is to not grant that particular partial that zoning, that's a substantial change. Ultimately, it is in the discretion of the chair to make that ruling. However, if the members do disagree, they can move to overturn the decision of the chair and that is something that requires debate and I will touch on that a bit later in the presentation.

Um, member Bolic has a question on the decision um to have something in writing. Mhm. is like right there that's in writing. Yeah. So is some is it at the discretion of the chair? Can the chair accept something in writing that is a digital writing that all can see? That would be um up to the chair and how they're interpreting your rules of order. And so I under Robert's rules I don't want to impine opine on something that is specific to Will County or specific to the chair on any given matter. But it but the chair can have that discretion if it follows along

if it is if it is the chair's rule and the and the body's wish. Yes. So let's say you did present something and it's say it was questioned and the chair did accept it. The body, as I said previously, could always move to overturn the decision of the chair. That being and that would then be the official interpretation of the rules for that body at that time. However, the chair does have extreme amount of authority and latitude when interpreting the rules if the rules are silent. Okay, I don't see any more questions. Continue, sir. Thank you.

Next slide. All right. Subsidiary motions. These are the motions that you only can use once you have a main motion on the table or on the floor. And there is each one has something a little bit different. And this is the hierarchy of the motions. So lay on table is your top ranking motion. That means we don't want to discuss this now. We're going to take this meth and lay it on the table. Once a meas measure has been laid on the table, it can only come off if the board has it on a future agenda to take it off the table for consideration. And previous question, and I heard someone earlier mention previous, that is to end debate. When someone moves the previous question and it is seconded, uh, and I see this a lot of times happen, it doesn't just shut off debate. It requires a twothirds vote of the assembly to actually end the debate once the previous question has been moved and seconded. Um and then the next one is to limit or extend times of debate. In some bodies, in some bodies, uh, and mine being one of them, we would often limit a debate to being this is a 15minute debate, this is a 30 minute debate, and the members can a vote to extend or limit that debate based on our rules. This is one of those items that requires a twothirds vote, especially if you're trying to limit um debate. This and previous question or call the question requires a twoth3s vote of all the members because you're taking away the members rights under Robert's rules of order for active participation. In Robert's rules, the majority the majority wins, but it's also meant to protect the rights of the minority

members to have their opinion heard. A twothirds vote is basically a check on the of the minority on the m majority to make sure they're not limiting debate. Next one is postpone to a certain time. Now, this is the one that people get confused with motion to table. Um, this is the motion. So, if you want to postpone it and have it come back next month, this is the motion you should use because once it's tabled, this is just basically, okay, the motion's on the table. We're not going to touch it until further order of this body. If you refer something to a certain time, that is directing that the body bring it back on the next agenda. Commit or otherwise known as refer to a committee. Let's say something gets to the county board or to the committee the whole and it's not quite it wasn't quite ready for prime time to begin with or you need more information or some events have occurred since then. This is the one you use to send it back to the committee for more consideration. And of course, we did touch amend uh significantly. And then the one that is one of my least favorite, but is also one of the ones that was always most frequently used on my board, which is postpone indefinitely, which is when the board doesn't quite want to make the a no vote or a yes vote on something and they just want to kill the item. Postpone indefinitely just sends it right back. Just basically, there's no more discussion on this. We're not going to give this any more time. Why not just vote? I heard why not just vote to table. You can pull back a motion to postpone indefinitely. Um once granted, um you would actually need to re it can you need to either have it be rescended

or reconsidered. And that is a incidental motion. And we're not I'm not going to spend too much time on incidentals. All right. I I see three at least three questions here. I'll stop you here. Um remember new quest. Thanks. Sorry. Okay. Thank you. Um I actually have two questions. The first one uh under limit or extend limits limit or extend limits of debate. Do you where do those original limits come from? Are they in your county board rules? So we have we are going to touch on the debate and some of the limits that already exist in Robert's rules coming up.

Okay, perfect. And then my second question is if you're tableabling something, you said you could bring it back. How what's the process for initiating bringing it back? Does someone have to make a motion? Well, first it has to be on the agenda. It has to be on the agenda. Okay. And then you make a motion to remove the item from the table. Got it. So you can't just randomly at a meeting if it's not on the agenda say you want to bring it off the bring it back from the table. Correct. That's why postpone is actually a lot of times better than tableabling. Mr. Butler

also I just wanted to clarify on lay laying something on a table. There has to be a pressing matter before the committee that would would call for that. If there is no other pressing um matter then they cannot call for that that is according to Robert's rules you are correct but the pressing matter is determined by the chair Judy uh uh member Ogala okay so I'm I just want some more clarification lay on the table can you give me an example again

let's say I have um there is a matter on I'll use a zoning issue Again, um let's say you're trying to reszone a parcel and I'll use this as an extreme example, but let's say you've found out that there is an emergency court hearing um in your circuit court in your circuit court at the time discussing whether or not there should be a injunction or something. So, that could be considered a pressing matter to lay it on the table. That's an extreme option, but a laying on the table is just saying we're not we're going to put this off to the side for right now. There they're there always has to be a motion to take it off the table, which is why you should always, in my my opinion, always use uh postpone to a certain time instead

instead of lay it on the table. Okay? Or postpone indefinitely. Or postpone indefinitely. Is postpone indefinitely. Does that require twothirds voter? No, just majority vote. That's just a majority vote. Okay. And then um previous question. Can you give me an example of that too? That would be um a previous question is to uh end debate. So call the question. Call the question. Oh, it's call the question. Yes. So if you want to call call the question and you're in the middle of something, you're in the middle of a debate, you call the question.

Uh somebody seconds the call to question. debate doesn't just end. Then you start a debate on whether or not you're calling the question on whether or not debate should end. And that requires a twothirds vote to end debate because you're stopping debate. And and can I jump in since we're talking about calling the question? Is it true that after a member speaks and debates the item, they are not allowed to call the question, does it have to go to a brand new member that has not spoken on the issue? Yes. Okay. Um, thank you member Ogala. And I have uh member Traneer has a question.

Just a question about tableabling something. If if the board votes to table something and and does that item then appear on every agenda going forward and captioned as tabled. So how do you know that you want to remove it from the t? I mean it just it's in the minutes. it's in the minutes as tabled and so if you want to take something from the table and it has to be from the same session that it was tabled in. So let's say you had something tabled four years ago and you trying to bring it back now. No, you can't do that. It can it has to be from this session of the board to bring something back from a table. So part of it is on part of it is

decides to put it back on the agenda. It depends on your it depends on your rules of order. So in K I'll say in Kendall we could have four members say to the chair we want this item on the agenda and it would have to be on the agenda. It depends on the rules of order and how everything is written. That's clear as mud but okay. All right. No other questions. Okay. Oh yeah. Great. So clarification, tableabling only works until the session is ended and then it's never brought up again unless somebody makes that motion in a new session over again.

Well, because the county board ceased to exist. Once the sess once your session is over and a session isn't today, the session is December 1st of an even number year to the next even number year. So it's a year. Yeah, it's a year. Two years. a two years the session of the board is a it's a two-year session

today is the meeting. So the next meeting and so that is partially incumbent on me for the confusion on that one. But yeah, a session of the board is two years and so once the two years has passed there is no original action before. Right. Right. Next slide please. Next slide. All right. Now, we're going to cover the transaction of business. A meeting is for like a full county board meeting is for the transaction of business. It is not meant for a discussion of issues or talking about the issues. A meeting is meant for debate and the the debate is the essential part of the transaction of business. Idle discussion back and forth can actually hinder the hinder the process. Next slide, please. For debate, it must pertain to whether the proposal under consideration should be adopted, unless your board rules say that we can reject a particular measure. And occasionally in zoning matters, you may want to have something be shall this item be rejected. Uh but usually most things should be whether or not it should be adopted or not. And it must debate must pertain to the what is pending before the body. Again it cannot debate cannot be attack a member or a me the motives of a member and we go back to parliamentary language in regards to a member. Debate cannot contain words like lie, liar, fraud and cannot impugn a member's character. Any of those things could be considered on parliamentary language and the chair could rule you out of order for that. Next slide.

Go back. Oh yeah. And debate should alternate between those in favor and those opposed. And sometimes that's easy. Sometimes you know beforehand where it's going to be. Sometimes it's it it is up to the membership to also self self police and try to gain the chair's attention. Member Butler.

So obviously it's pretty easy here. Democrat. Well, again you can just pretty much pick that. But I just want to make one one more point. When a person makes a motion, isn't it proper that that person be the first one to speak? Yes, it is proper that that person be the first one to speak and also reserves the right to close. I mean, and that's because it would make sense to make things expedient. The person who makes the motion explains it and then maybe a lot of questions are answered. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Butler. Miss Ogala,

thank thank you. So, so tagging on to what he just said was um so if somebody makes a motion and then they speak and then somebody else decides to raise their hand and speak um and call the question, would that be something that can be allowed or shall the debate go? You said the debate goes until they end the the motion. So if someone is in if someone is debating and if so in your hypothetical is the person interjecting the call the question at that time or are they waiting until the person finishes they're recognized by the chair and then they call the question that's how they do it. Yes. So if they are interrupt if they get not interrupted

they're if they get the floor Yes. and they call the question or move the previous question and the move of the previous question is seconded that requires a twoth3 vote to shut off debate. Okay, but you still have to debate the moving of the previous question. Okay, thank you. Okay, I don't see any other questions. Continue, please.

All right, next slide. This one. Okay, keep it on this one, please. Uh, each member may only speak twice on the motion. This is when you're in debate. So each member may only speak twice and a member may not speak a second time until all the other members that wish to have spoken have spoken. Granted, that is up to the chair of police, but that is something that according to Robert's rules, that is how debates are handled. Okay? And then then we'll stick with the time limits in your rules. But under Robert's rules, each speech is limited to 10 minutes. And this applies per day. And so if you are all of a sudden having a meeting where an item takes two hours in the meeting and you postpone it to the next meeting, everyone gets their ability to speak back again at the next meeting. Um committees of fewer than 12 members do not have the same restrictions and that is in Robert's rules. Um that's something they can do something more for for informal consideration where the the chair can allow a little bit more of a free form discussion on things and a little bit more back and forth, but for larger bodies, discussion is not really as appropriate as debate is.

Next slide. Can I interrupt for a second? Uh, member Ogala, thank you. So, so for this situation, our committees are typically less than 12 members. So, um, do we need to put that in the rules because I think we just follow one rule for that for all our meetings. Should we be should we update our rules so that if it's a committee less than 12 members? Do should we say that in our rules? It depends on it depends on your committee. You may have some committees where you want it to be more formally structured. Okay. I'll use zoning my planning, building, and zoning committee in Kendall. We wanted that more formally structured,

right? While a committee, for example, that was what we would call a reporting committee where the only matters of business were the elected officials or department heads that gave reports, we wanted that to be more informal discussion. So, it really depends on your committee. So, we could leave it in the rules to say 10 whatever our timing is and and just that specific committee, the chair could allow it. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Member new quiz.

Thank you. So, I see where it says each speech is limited to 10 minutes and it applies per day. What What exactly does that mean? Like if if we're debating a topic and I speak for 10 minutes, can I now speak for 10 minutes on another topic in that it's only for the item being discussed. So, if you have one item being discussed, you have two at bats for that item. Once you move on to another item, you get to start again. It resets. Yes. So the per day would come into effect where let's say I had a committee meeting in the a more you know or No, that doesn't make sense. What do they mean by per day? Maybe that's a better question.

Per day is so let's say you're discussing an item. You have a you're discussing a motion. Motion is you postpone till the next day for one reason or another or next meeting. That's when the day resets. So the All right. I have uh Mr. Butler and then I think I want to offer an opportunity for our um member online if she happens to have any questions. I don't know how to keep track of that. So let's go with Mr. Butler first.

So obviously when you say that speech limited 10 minutes that that only applies to General Robert's rule. It doesn't apply to us because we have bylaws that allow certain amounts of time to talk. Okay. And then um the other thing is when we talk about the smaller committees, we generally refer to those smaller committees from smaller organizations. Not a large organization like us that has rules that has subcommittees that handle things. We would generally be expected to handle everything the same way. Yeah. Unless your board rules of order specifies something different. All right. Next slide. One minute. Mr. Cesca. Um this it's been a while since we've had to use a system from CO. So, member Costa, would you like to ask a question or

Oh, okay. All right. Fair enough. Then, let me go to member Freeman.

There we go. Um, I have to just get clarification on the 10 minutes. So, it's like we're we start a board meeting rule. we start a board meeting. Do I get 10 minutes for the whole It depends on your It dep No, it's on the item. I know, but if if we were to change it would be 10 minutes per item on the agenda. It would be so 10 minutes per speech per item. Okay, that's too many. Thank you. All right, move along, sir. All right, next slide. All right, let's move this along. Um, exactly.

All right, next item is getting business back on track. Um if it seems like things aren't sticking to an agenda, members really do have um two options. The first is to if the discussion doesn't pertain to an agenda item, you can always use the the I call for orders of the day. and calling for orders of the J is just informing the chair that in the member's opinion discussion has veered so far off that or it has veered up to something not on the agenda at all and it is then up to the chair's discretion whether or not to accept the call of orders and to refocus everything on the particular item. Call for orders of the day is is a motion. It does not require a second. It does not require a vote. It is basically a point of order for the chair that in the members in the members thought process they have veered so substantially.

Does that have to be a motion made by a member of the committee or can the chair just say the chair always has the ability to refocus discussion? Okay, that's what I do. So, I just wanted to make sure cuz I've never used the phrase call for the order of the day. I just And the chair always has discretion on trying to get things back on track or if an item has veered off to all of a sudden, for example, the board is take talking about when they should break for lunch and that's not on the agenda. Somebody could use call for orders of the day or the chair could just say we're getting back on track. Okay, that's what I wanted to check. The next item is just I'm sorry it's hard for you to tell. I just want to make sure that our members get our questions answered. Uh, member Ogala,

thank you. So, if somebody says, "I call for orders of the day or if they say point of order," is that the same thing? Uh, strictly speaking, they are two different items. Okay. Uh, point of orders are something different than calling for orders of the day. Okay. Thank you. Calling for orders of the day is basically you're saying we're not sticking to the agenda. A point of order can be you're violating Robert's rules somehow. Just hang on. We're gonna We are in uh training session, so we kind of want to try to keep it keep it that way. Um me uh this is very difficult here, Mr. Butler.

So I think what she's saying is like when you say uh point of order, that is a time where you don't necessarily need to be recognized. You can call for a point of order just like you can call for the orders of the day. I think that's kind of what she was alluding to. No. Yes. So, you don't have to be meaning you can that is one of those few items where you can interject and parliamentary inquiry

is another one of those where you can interject but if you misuse the interjection the chair can always rule you out of order. Um and then the next item under getting business back on track is if you think debate has become repetitive um you can always do a um call for a vote which is move the previous question or call the question. All right. Next item. This needs another next slide. So postponing and referring. If you don't think the council or the board is ready to vote on something, you everyone has two options. You can postpone the matter to another time or you can refer the item back to another entity for review and report back. So, for example, if you have a zoning issue that is here and you didn't think that the zoning board, I'll use the zoning board of appeals and you didn't think the zoning hearing was thorough enough or it didn't vet it out, you could always refer it back to the zoning board of appeals for another rehering or you can refer it back to a committee of the board for another piece of information. Next slide. One more. Putting business on hold. If you think you need a break, you can move to recess for a certain amount of time and that is something that does need a motion in the second. The chair can in extraordinary circumstances recess the meeting unilaterally but extraordinarily. So if the members think they need a 10-minute break, I move for a 10-minute break. my experience and this is just me not a Robert's rules thing always break for a definite period of time with a definite time to return because if you say 10 minutes those 10 minutes can turn to 15 to 20 so I always would say if let's say we're breaking now and we wanted to break for I would say I move to recess

until 1:15 instead of just saying 5 10 minutes that's just not a Robert's rules thing that's just a one of the things I have always preferred The next item, if you want to put business on hold, is move to adjourn. And move to adjourn is one of those motions that is always in order and never debatable. Um, so even if you have items left on your agenda, there can be a motion made to adjurnn. It's not good business. It's not good parliamentary practice to do so. And I strongly advise ever doing that unless you have completely lost um let's say there's been some issues going on with people in the crowd or things like that then yes I would recommend that but yes strictly speaking a motion to adjurnn is always in order and never debatable.

Mr. Puchasca how what kind of vote does that need? Majority just a simple majority. Just a simple majority. That's one of those items that if if I would re I always would recommend and I have recommended in Kendall that we got that tweaked so it's a majority once the agenda has been completed but beforehand it requires an expanded majority so that we address that in our rules. Thank you. So Mr. Butler go ahead.

You you you may not believe this but there have been times where we have met for eight hours. So in that time would it be proper to move to adjourn and if they did that would the remaining items be unfinished business on the next agenda? That would be a discussion for the chair and how the chair would want to put that on the next agenda pursuant to how your county board rules operate. Um normally yes I would say that should be unfinished business but every county and every county board rules and bylaws is specific. So that would be something I would recommend you discuss with the chair if that situation ever came up. All right. Okay.

Next item is uh one more. I think we need to revisit a previous item. So let's say if you're in the meeting and I'm going to go back to that zoning issue again. Um during a course of as Mr. Butler said one of your meetings that you comes to light midway through that an item that you had been approved early on something uh you came to light that the me the petitioner or something misled or you find something out that would have substantially changed your vote. If you are on the prevailing side of a motion, you can always do a motion to reconsider, but it has to be made in the same legislative day or at the next legislative day from when you've from that meeting. So, you can always move to reconsider something, but it has to be done immediately and you have to have been on the prevailing side and a majority has to agree to revisit the item first before you debate. So, if something came to light midway through a meeting or between a meeting and your next meeting and the chair or speaker wanted to put something on the agenda for a motion to reconsider that is how you reconsider something that has been adopted. I am going to put a caveat on that in a second um especially for the next um for the next legislative day which is if something has substantial action has been taken um and if it's the same day that really no substantive action has taken because chances are it has not been signed by the executive. Chances are no one has acted on it. But if you ever try to revisit something or resend something or amend something previously adopted and substantive action has been taken procedurally according to Robert's rules, that item cannot be revisited.

So just to be clear, it has to be the same session or the very next meeting. Same day or the same day, the same legislative day or the very next meeting or the very next meeting for reconsider for reconsideration. I think that's what what we've been following and then the next next slide before because I think the next slide maybe all members will wait for questions until you wrap this up and then we'll go. Yeah. And then I got

for revisiting past items, a motion to resend or amend something previously adopted. So while reconsider allows for flexibility that same legislative day, a motion to rescend or amend something previously adopted can be done subsequently too. Um, however, I have to say it cannot be made after substantial action has been taken. So, let's say uh the easiest would be to be a monetary issue. Let's say the county board has allocated $10,000 or $100,000 for something. The checks have been cut, contracts have been signed, and then six months later you try to do a motion to resend or amend it to a lesser amount. the checks have already been cut, everything's been signed. That is considered something that substantial action has been taken that you cannot do and you cannot resend or amend something. If it is uh a resolution by the county board saying this is the sense of the county board on whether HB123 in Springfield should be adopted or not. That is one of those things that could be easily amended or rescended. So the key is the substantial action.

Are you open to questioning them? Okay. Thank you. I I have member Ogala then but member Butler then member newquist. So member Ogala you are you have the floor ma'am. Thank you. So I just want to clarify I understand the same day that makes sense. If I'm the pro I'm in the prevailing side whether the prevailing was a yes or no is irrelevant. That was the prevailing vote.

So the same day makes sense to me. So, we'll move three items down and I happen to look at something that I hadn't looked at before or something that's changed my mind or somebody says something and three items down that changed my mind for the previous that makes sense. But then you said to the next meeting, the next meeting of the cell so like the next county board meeting at county board. Yes. So the it says in Robert's rules that session or the immediately the the next session of that body or that meeting or the next meeting of that body. Okay. So it couldn't be something we do a county board and then we take it up saying legislative committee. That would not Okay. Thank you.

Um member Butler. Uh let's just say that someone wants to resend. Does it have to be before the adjournment or can just be that day reached back to the uh chair? Um if you want to if you want to do something you can resend or reconsider. Uh reconsider. Reconsider is something you can make at that time because it was the item was on the agenda. If it's at for the next meeting, you need to reach out to the chair so they can make sure it is on the agenda. Okay. So I got you. So then they would know that it there's this possibility. So no

um I'm just curious when they say one day because we meet once a month technically for the county board. So we would never have the next day but isn't the is the next day mostly referred to like conferences when there's like two or three day sessions. Uh it I would say the next day is referred to the next legislative day of that session. So it could be the next county board day.

Okay. And we have done that in Kendall where we have had a motion to reconsider um and we have had it brought back and it gets for some item was fa an item failed. One of the main advocates that was on staff was not there the day it failed. So to give the advocate a chance to speak for it again, the county, somebody that was in the prevailing side, meaning the side that defeated the measure, made the motion to reconsider and then that at the next legislative day we and and just to be clear, anytime that day or before business hours or before adjournment. What do you mean by like when can you make that motion to reconsider?

You can make a motion to reconsider as long as the board is in session. Okay. And then if you're to do something rescend or amend, um it requires a twothirds vote with no notice and just a majority with notice. However, in Illinois, because of the open meeting act requirements, everything would be require notice. So everything would require a majority vote at that point. But that being said, it's all contingent on whether or not the item is included on the agenda pursuant to your board rules of order. Member Nquest.

So, I voted for something at a county board meeting and somewhere along and it passed and somewhere along the way I realized, oh god, I wish I wouldn't have voted that way. So, now I I can have the opportunity to reconsider at the next board meeting. Do I need to does it need to be on the agenda in order so can the chair refuse to add the reconsideration to the agenda? That would be a question for your board rules of order. So I would say it is up to the discretion of the chair. Okay. So if our rules allowed the chair control over

and I will say also the chair could also be taking into consideration whether or not something substantially has been done in that matter. So would the county executive signing the resolution constitute something substantially? That would be an excellent question for the state's attorney. Okay, got it. So now what is the difference between the reconsidering and the rescending? I couldn't I make a motion to resend that?

Yes. Um and for boards such as legislative boards with notice requirements, there is not much of a difference. The motion to resend is mainly meant for um other types of organizations rather than um elective boards with notice requirements except I could I could resend past the first meeting. Yes. And and but there again it would have to be on the agenda. Correct. And also what if there was if there was substantive action taken I would not

the if there was substantive action taken. It's twofold. A the chair could always say rule that motion out of order. Two. The bigger issue could be you could be entering into a legal quagmire at that point and you need to consult your attorneys. Got it. Okay. Thank you. That was really helpful. Two more questions that I see. Uh three now. Um Mr. Richmond this point I'm guessing.

So Sherry uh you were sharing part of my brain on that one. Thank you very much for asking the question. So if it's if you if it's not on the following agenda, Matt, so it's you know whatever 30 days have passed and but it hasn't been put on the agenda, it becomes a mute point then. Correct. Even if it wasn't substantial. Correct. And that's when if you want to follow something up, that's when you would a more proper motion would be give the chair notice and ask to put a motion to resend on the agenda if substantial compliance hasn't been done. Yeah. So say say we're in a meeting today. It's now the next day. What's today? Tuesday. So Wednesday.

Yeah. I go and I put that request in and it just gets denied. Then it's basically a move point. Okay. Thank you. All right. Member Bulock. Oh,

sorry. So, if I want to make a motion to reconsider, the meeting is over and I go to the chair and I say, "Hey, the next time we meet, I'm going to make a motion to reconsider that. Can you put that on the agenda?" Is the chair obligated to prevent substantial movement from happening? That is a uh question for your rules of order, past practice of the board, and legal counsel. That is one of those things. I'm sorry if it sounds like I'm giving a copout answer on that one because legal considerations could be in jeopardy at that point. I don't want to opine on that. I'm going to confine my question strictly speaking to Robert's roles. Okay.

All right. That's member Ogala. The hardest part of the job is that the way if anyone sits up here, the way this is set up with the extra chairs over there, it's it's very confusing. So, member Ogala, floor is yours. Okay. So, my question is this. So, we are going through our agenda. We go through item number seven. We vote. Okay. Now I come to be after the after everyone has voted and let's just say the count was 74 and then I want to change my mind and vote yes or whatever I can do that I can

no if you were on the you have to be on the prevailing side. Oh, so I'm in the prevailing. I'm in the seven. So that was a yes, let's say. Or well, the nose could been prevailing, right? Depends on the situation. The nose could been prevailing if required a super majority. If it's a no, it's a super majority. So nos are nose could been prevailing, but in the scenario you gave it, the seven beat the four. Yes. Okay. So you would have to have been a vote in the affirmative on the prevailing side.

Right. So if you make a motion to reconsider, it's not an automatic. The board first has to grant whether or not it is something they are reconsidering. They want to bring it back. Just because one member in your scenario wants to bring it back doesn't mean the board is obliged to. There can be a debate on whether or not to bring it back and that yes is just a majority and a no is a supermajority. So a no could be prevailing if let's say it was a seven seven right

it's a tie no is prevailing it could be a seven it could be 47 in which case nose would be prevailing however it could be a vote that requires I'll just make up a three/arter vote at the board and then the 74 the motion's defeated because it doesn't hit the super majority the four no votes are the prevailing side. Okay. So, it it it's all is the question is who is prevailing on any given matter can bring the motion. Okay. And then let's just say this. We're in the vote and I voted yes. And I want to change my vote. They they've called the they've done the roll call. Everyone has voted and I would like to change my vote.

Has the vote been announced by the chair? So, if it Okay. So, if it's been announced by the chair, I can't correct. But if it hasn't been announced, you you are able to change your vote unless unless your board rules prohibit that. And I don't think they do. So if we're voting and they're still counting up the yeses and nos and I say what would my motion what would I say? I'd like to change my vote to a yes or no or what would I what statement would I make?

Um so Mr. Mr. I would interject when the when the chair is either tallying up or that Mr. Chairman, how is my vote recorded? And the chairman would then say yes in the affirmative or no in the negative. Okay. And if you said and if once the chair has entered how your vote has said how your vote has been recorded at that time, you can say, "Mr. Chairman, I would like my vote to reflect uh something else." Yeah. Thank you. All right. Please proceed.

All right. Next slide. Is it ever okay to interrupt the speaker? Strictly speaking, it should be avoided. But if you are, you can interrupt a speaker um to request information if you feel you need more information um from the speaker. You can ask the speaker to yield. You can ask for a point of parliamentary inquiry if you need a con a clarification on the rules of the body. And so that is not a point of order. that is a parliamentary inquiry onto the procedures. A point of personal privilege um raising a point that something is interfering with your participation. For example, that could be noisy people in the audience. It could be the temperature of the room and trying to see if the that too. Um you could raise a point of order on whether or not you feel that the rules are being violated. However, it is important to note that the chairman is the one that ultimately makes the determination on what is an appropriate interruption. There are a few other items. Um, I did say I was going to touch on one which is an appeal. So, if the chair makes a ruling, um, the body always can appeal the decision of the chair. and an appeal of the decision of the chair. I just want to double check something is it is one of those items that you can interrupt. It is debatable and it takes a majority to agree with you that the chair is wrong in their ruling. I recommend that be used very very very seldomly. Uh the chair has a lot of latitude in presiding over an assembly. They have to go by the rules of the or the organization. The chair is uh perfectly in all situations a chair is fallible. It is they are not the pope. No offense

on that. None taken but it is one of those things I would only appeal the most egregious violation of the rules just from a practical standpoint on things. All right, any questions? Uh next slide. Any questions in totem? Okay. So, is your slide presentation finished? I am. We will just open it up to general general questions. Okay. Let me see if I can keep up then. I have member Hickeyi first. Hi. Yes. Okay. So, one of the things that you said early on was that um at the full board meeting it should just be whether we're going to adopt.

Yes. Adopt. So some people will be in favor, some will be opposed. But should it be factf finding about things that have already been discussed in committees?

If you're in debating, if you're reviewing anything formally, then it should be based on the record before you. If you want to discuss it more informally, then you need to make a motion for informal consideration and allow that back and forth. A debate is basically for and against based on the record presented and that is default setting for any Robert's rules debate. So anything more informally and if you want to have a discussion that is for informal consideration. Okay. Thank you

member Freeman. So, one of the things you did not mention that I am curious about is the suspension of rules.

Yes, Robert's rules um and depending on your board rules or your board bylaws can be suspended. It requires a twothirds vote in any situation. Um sometimes yes suspending the rules is needed for adding um I'll say there's something called that um standard code of parliamentary procedure uses that I greatly appreciate but Robert's rules lacks it. So the best way to do it is a suspension of the rules. It's called a Gregorian not motion and I am not going to expect you to remember that. It's basically we have effed up parliamentary procedure so much we can't find our way out. So let's suspend the rules and basically get us out of this situation we've got ourselves into. And so a lot of times suspending the rules can be beneficial to undo some things that okay Robert's rules is not meant to tie the hands completely of the body. Robert's rules is meant to assist. So sometimes in if in the determination of the body it is best to suspend the rules to achieve what the body needs to as an end. Yes. So in the in the scenario I gave where we've so effed up the yeah we just need help to undo it. That's when suspending the rules comes in handy. Um, in other scenarios where you're just the rules are inconvenient, yes, people suspend the rules all the time. I I never appreciated or cared for it when people did that. But yes, sometimes when the the suspension of the rules is meant for when the rules get in the way of actually accomplishing the public business

with suspension of the rules, did you mention two a twothirds vote? requires a two-th3 vote. We might want we might want to double check on our rules because they I want to say that it might be three-fifths vote. It could be with members by Roberts. Yeah, three-fifth vote with the members present possibly. I just didn't want anybody to get confused in case that was inaccurate. You want you have a follow-up question?

So, is it advisable to do it on a reg suspend rules on a regular basis? I would say it's not, but that is um something depending on how things are being handled, you may need to in particular scenarios. That is something and I have not taken the time to review or watch all your past meetings recently. Um, so I can I don't not want to opine on whether or not they have been they should have been suspended or not because I was under the impression that suspension of the rules after I I'd sat through the UCCCI training one day, it was

that a suspension of the rules should not be used on a regular basis. It should be something that is only used when like absolutely necessary. Correct. Once in a blue moon kind of thing. That is correct. All right. Thank you, Mr. Butler. So, um, obviously if you were going to suspend the rules on a regular basis, that would show some sort of premeditation that you were going to be suspending rules. And I would say, of course, that is not proper etiquette. But suspension of the rules aren't just for getting yourself out of hole. It's also for allowing important information, maybe a little bit more debate time, right?

You know that we don't have enough information. We would norally limit something three minutes. give them six and your board rules of order does have those limits,

right? So, and anytime that would come up, it would be appropriate. Um I just my question is you know can you explain and go over the importance of remaining gerine to a topic and also uh the difference between debate between you know uh on a motion and how we handle public hearings when we're questioning uh people uh that come to speak. So a debate is it's the internal members of this body discussing whether or not they are for or against something that is very very very different than a public hearing where by its very nature you are taking public testimony and so if let's say you're taking public testimony at uh I'll use zoning board of appeals let's say they are conducting a hearing that is a very different type of uh meeting than the county board and keeping Germaine. Yes, everything has to be gerine to the topic at hand. Um everything has to be um at least related to the item. I don't want to be discussing uh a zoning matter and then all of a sudden go start devolving into the price of widgets in China. That would not fit the germanine.

Okay. Satisfied. Yeah. Uh, I got you. Thank you. Okay. I have two things and we're just going to be hypothetical here. We're discussing an item on the agenda and the chair doesn't like something that I bring up. Sorry, Joe, but let's just say I bring up something and it it's related to the item, but the chair does not like it. Does the chair have the authority to stop me from speaking? And how do you handle a situation like that? without particulars, right? Yeah, it's hard.

Without particulars, um if debate is going on and the member has the floor, it is the members the member has the floor. Um until they've yielded it back to the chair at that point. However, I'm going to put a huge caveat in that if the member is using unparliamentary language or is otherwise violating the rules of the body, of course, the chair has the ability to interject at any given time.

Um, in that, so I'm not going to say that no, the chair can never interject. The chair has a lot of authority and can always interject. Uh, it's just a question of how they're interjecting. In an ideal scenario, no, the chair should not interrupt the member, but the chair has a lot of authority to keep to keep uh to keep make sure everything stays germanine, make sure we're all abiding by the proper decorum and procedures.

Okay. And then then my other question is this. So, it's a little bit confusing when you when we said in the very beginning, I don't know if I can find it right away fast, but we were talking about when when we're in our meeting, our county board meeting, because we're not supposed to I think you said debate, maybe um we're supposed to just discuss the issue at supposed to debate. We're supposed to debate, not discuss, not discuss informal considerate. So, discussion is more of a back and forth. like today me answering your questions that's us having a discussion on the matter and so the committee the whole by its very nature is a meant for more informal consideration.

Okay. So this is us having a discussion the back and forth. Now a debate would be you saying whether or not for example you saying what if this motion should be approved yes or no what whatever side you're on on a motion and then the other person responding this motion should be approved or defeated yes or no back and forth that's a debate however let's say you have the floor and I have a your main question Mhm. I can interrupt and ask if would the member yield for a question.

That makes sense because I'm confused about what you said. So Micah could say would I yield for a question so I can explain whatever it was that I was saying. Correct. Okay. All right. Thank you. So when I know because a lot of us do chair meetings. So if a member were to to announce that, can the speaker yield for a question? Does the chair have to recognize that person in order to just to keep keep everything everything running running smoothly? The the other member can't say, "Yeah, go ahead." Right. Like that way we can keep it Well, the Yeah. Okay.

Because the chair is ultimately the one in control of whoever has the floor. All right. I have um I have member Bullock next. Okay. So, when it said that debate is supposed to be for and against taking turns and that kind of thing, we have no way of showing whether we're for or against something. Well, sometimes I and I understand that it is ultimately it is up to the chair on how they want to call. The ideal scenario is rotate between for and against, right?

So, sometimes it is obvious, it is obvious in the room. Um, and I'll use this in as an example. Let's say the chair has the committee vote to recommend before him. He the chair knows who's roughly for and who's against based on the people who uh made the committee vote. Let's say the person that made the motion, they get to speak first. Strictly speaking, a person that makes the motion should never be opposed to the motion that they made.

Mhm. So they would get to speak first and then it is up to the chair to kind of do the best that they can rotating back and forth. Our our chairs do typically make the motion to put it on the floor and whether they're in favor or not in favor. It's been past practice to where we do put it on the floor practice. So once there's a motion in a second, we always defer to the the person making the motion. They could be either for or against it, but that's typically what we do just to put it on the floor. Okay. Um, wait. And so, so we also don't know whether the person wanting to speak is going to answer ask a question or is going to debate.

Well, if you if you want to ask a question and you want to inter and you want to interrupt another member, that's one of those things where you can interject. But is that a speaking out while that person's talking or is that a being recognized in the chair and then asking the chair? You can you can ask you can ask if the person would yield like during a natural pause you can ask if a person will yield for a question and then the chair would ask would ask it does require a little bit of and the chair could always shut that down at some point too but it's not ide sometimes it is not ideal

we're trying not to interrupt if you're trying not definitely trying not to interrupt individuals then you should try to get recognized and go back and forth. That's where informal discussion comes in handy sometimes. Mr. Butler, so I don't know. I'm kind of tagging on to what um um the member from district four uh two. I I think we you know, one of the things she might have been questioning is once a motion goes to the floor, it belongs to the floor. Correct. And so nobody could take it off unless it's voted on. Correct.

Okay. And I I think that was something that came up that she was trying to address. But I had one other question. When you know our agendas a lot of times they'll say old business and they'll say new business. And sometimes old business will be addressed and sometimes it won't or sometimes new business will be addressed and it won't because it just says old business but it says nothing under it. Should when it says old business or new business, shouldn't there be a topic under that? It depends. And then and then if it doesn't say anything, does that mean that anything could be brought up under old business?

Not necessarily. So if it so if you address if you're going on the agenda and it says new business. Yes. And there's nothing under it. Sometimes they they come up with new business and sometimes they could say no if it is part of it is first does your board rules of order say that there has to be new and old business on the agenda. My in my county we always had to have those sections on the agenda. That was in our board rules of order. If if your question is should they bring something up that could be germanine to MA or not that's a question for legal counsel on that.

I guess what I'm saying is if you put old business if you must put old business and new business on the agenda. Mhm. Then when it gets to that could any old business or new business be put on there or does it also have to be listed under that item on the agenda? So, new business definite agenda items would have to be placed under new business. I am hesitant to answer. According to Robert's rules, okay, according to Robert's rules, it should have something listed on on it.

According to your board rules of order and the open meetings act, that's an completely different item that I don't want to touch and I would suggest if you have more questions. But we do know that no matter what, it should be handled consistently. It should be handled consistently. But but just to be clear, any if there's nothing listed under old business or new business, it could be discussed, but there will absolutely not be a vote. Correct. Yeah,

you could. Correct. Anything could be brought up by the chair and that becomes a public notice issue. Anything can be discussed as long as there is no ultimate But like for open meetings act, you couldn't talk about something that was on new business if it wasn't listed. I mean, you're saying you could talk about it even though for open meetings, it wasn't on the agenda, but you can't vote on it for open meetings act issues. Discuss that with your state's attorney. and that member newquist did did you

Jen I think I okay so I'm chairing a committee meeting so it's more informal and we're discussing whether the new chair should be black or brown and I have a a committee member who's is speaking they're giving their opinion on black or brown but then they start talking about the carpet and the tables and redecorating the whole committee room. Do I as the chair have the right to limit their comments even though they have the floor to redirect them toward the question of whether the chair should be black or brown? Yes. Thank you. It's a gerineess.

All right. Uh I do have another question or comment. Mala, thanks. So um so on our agenda, yeah, we have old business and new business and the chair will say I don't have any old business or I don't have any new business or whatever. Is the chair the only one that can bring old or new business forward or can a member of the committee also say well I have some old business or new business. That would be a I that'd be a question I'd have to look at your bylaws before I would look at that from a Robert's rules perspective.

Okay. Thank you. And I've always tried to make a habit of asking anybody if at the committee if they have any old business to be brought forward. I I don't know if all of us do, but that's something that I've tried, you know, just in case. So, yeah, maybe we do need a clarification on that. Um I have member Trir on what you said. Yes. Um, wouldn't it due to the Open Meetings Act, if you wanted to bring something forward under old business, wouldn't it need to be already on the agenda? Again, that's an open meetings act issue, and I am not going to appine or give you legal advice. I would defer all open meetings act issues to the state's attorney.

To me, it and the state's attorney has said this, if it's just something you want to talk about and you're not going to vote on it, you can do that. But if you're really wanting some kind of resolution and you want to vote, that's how you get your resolution, then it has to be on the agenda if you want a vote taken. That's my understanding. Okay. Very good. Mr. Pel, do you want to jump in? Yeah.

But there there there are two issues with regard to old business and new business. Uh typically, we've always had old business and new business on the agenda. whether or not there is specific items under old business or new business. If there is a specific item under old business or there are specific items under new business, those items are addressed and then as our practice has been, we go on to either other old business or other new business which is typically blank. And then from there, according to the state's attorney, we would go toward items that would be discussed in in those appropriate categories, but then a vote would not be taken on those. So, and if there are if there is no item under new business, for example, then there is no other new business item to follow that. That's been the the practice, as I understand, and the practice that we we've inherited pursuant to the rules.

All right. I don't see any other questions. Uh,

I just have one final thing. Um, and yes, I'm going to plug a book from the National Association of Parliamentarians. I highly I strongly suggest at least your chair or at least some of the members on the board get a book from them called the motion script cards. It actually tells you the proper form of making a motion for any particular categories. It tells you if you can interrupt. It tells you if it's debatable. It tells you if it's amendable, reconsiderable, and if it requires a majority vote or supermajority vote. So, it's just a very quick and easy reference guide. So, it is called motion script cards. Thank you. Um, another question. I do have a copy of that. If any of the county board members want to peek at it before purchasing it, they are more than welcome to take a peek.

All right. Thank you. So, Mr. Machasa,

thank you so much for your time um and your knowledge. I don't know if I'm capable of passing the exam. So, I would just like these board members to know that this was just for information. It gives us a little guideline on how to proceed. I don't expect any chair to have this memorized. And as long as we all can work together and try to run our meetings a little bit more smoother, it would be, you know, much appreciated. Just understand that um it's it's a lot of information and it's to hold a chair's feet to the fire is going to be extremely hard. You know, we're all going to try to do our best to to run a better meeting because of the information that you provided. So, thanks again for your time and u maybe we'll make this a habit to have you come back every once in a while. And

thank you very much for the invite and I I will say it's a very short drive from my office here.

All right. Thank you. All right. Let me um Is there any other new business? None listed. public comment relevant to matters under the jurisdiction of the county board. Any public comment? Um the only report that I have is I once again I want to thank Matthew Vresca for coming down and and giving his time. It was a pretty informational session. A lot of you members wanted wanted um you know an update on this stuff. So it was very good. Um no need for executive session. So I would be willing to entertain a motion to adjurnn.

Make a motion. Understood. I have a motion. I have a second. All those in favor of adjourning say I. All those opposed say nay. We are adjourned. Thank you everyone.