This may seem like a minor point in light of the larger outcome last night, but for some reason it really bothered me.

When the roll call vote was announced, the attorney made a point of blurting out something along the lines of "And the president votes!" They called off the roll, the first trustee voted YES, and the next four NO. Then when Hase was called, the attorney interjected that she did not need to vote because the motion had already been defeated, and she declined to vote on the record.

-At no point did the attorney or anyone else suggest that she would vote only in a tie.
-I am no parlianmentarian, but I have never heard of a roll call vote that only proceeded until one side enjoyed a majority.
-If the attorney's interpretation were legitimate, then the vote should have been called after the first 3 trustees voted NO, and the last trustee (Ladesic IIRC) should have been informed - just as the President was - that his vote was unnecessary and optional.

This may seem like a minor point, but perhaps that is why it bothers me. It IS a minor point, and should be second nature to ayone familiar with parliamentary procedure. The way the vote was conducted last night really gave the impression that the board - with benefit of legal counsel - essentially makes up the rules as they go along. And if they are eager to fudge the rules on such a relatively minor matter for whatever reason, why should we assume that they will be more likely to follow proper procedure in more significant matters?

Dins I was there and it bothered me too.

I can't address your question, but in some ways I am glad she didn't, especially if her answer was going to be "yes" (to demote) with a speech. I don't think anyone would have listened because the room had erupted (or was about to) with cheers. She might have been booed and we would have just heard more gavel. At any rate, if that had happened, it would have been a bit of a buzz kill (at least for me) of a remarkably compassionate evening, IMO.

I was heartened to see that Comerford and Thorsell had the courage and heart to change their vote. As someone said last night, "flip-flopping" is a negative term. But, they really listened to the people last night and channeled Lincoln. I hope that the letters, emails, phone calls and petitions prior to the meeting helped as well.

Sometimes, what may be the legal thing to do isn't always the right thing to do.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Admiral,

At best it was immature of me to attempt to goad her into voting. In the end, I don't really care. Throughout this whole ordeal she lacked grace, civility and class. In short...she stayed the same.

The look on her face as she walked out of that room friendless and seething made all of the work that we all did worthwhile. I'm still so pissed that this was handled the way it was that I could spit. Oops...I just did. Let me get paper towel. I look forward to her departure from town as much as I do my morning cup of coffee. And before anyone says it is time for healing...you can **** off. There are 6 kids that need not have gone through seeing Mommy and Daddy in the papers, on the internet. Never should have happened. Welcome to a new era in Glen Ellyn. You aren't going to like the ride.

Dinsdale -- Isn't it the case that the President doesn't vote except to break a tie? From a quick scan of our village code, I found this:

quote:

1-6-4: PRESIDENT TO PRESIDE:

The president shall preside at all meetings of the board of trustees, but shall vote only in those cases provided by law. (Ord. 3829, 4-22-1991)

I think the "cases provided by law" are in the Illinois Municipal Code. My guess is that you'd find the rest of the answer there.

So, I think it was procedurally correct for Hase not to vote. The clerk ran through all of the Trustees in the roll call, which I think was also procedurally correct. I was watching on TV, not at the meeting, but it sounded to me like the village clerk asked the President for her vote a couple times in the roll call and then the attorney corrected her. Since Hase was chairing the meeting, she could have made a statement after the vote saying which way she would have voted, but I can't imagine a scenario where such a statement would have done her any good.

quote:

Originally posted by Paul:
Dinsdale -- Isn't it the case that the President doesn't vote except to break a tie?

Like I said, I'm neither a parliamentarian, nor an expert on the village code. But watching it on TV it seemed clear that the lawyer wanted to make the point that "The president votes." I do not recall him saying anything about "only in case of a tie."

Moreover, if it were the case that standard procedure had the president voting in case of a tie, then there would hardly have been any reason for the attorney to specify beforehand that the president gets to vote.

Further, with only 5 trustees present, a tie would only occur if one trustee abstained.

I'm sure I'm coming across as pedantic, but I've seen grade school kids demonstrate a clearer idea of proper procedure than was shown last night.

I wasn't clear what order they called the trustees in. It seemed to me that after they called 3 or so, the clerk called Hase, and then she and/or the attorney said all trustees should be called and then the president. I do not recall them saying anything at that time about voting only in case of a tie.

Thanks for the cite.

I hope that I am more clear when I am communicating or conducting proceedings, than our village attorney impressed me as being last night.

Any idea how the village attorney gig is awarded?

quote:

Originally posted by GE Fan:
No, but in my opinion, we need fresh blood.

ISTM that when I attended some proceedings over 10 years the same guy was in the job. Wasn't overly impressed with his advice at that time either. As I recall, his justification of acting contrary tp the unambiguous language of the controlling ordinance was along the lines of "That's the way we have always done it."

Hmmmm....
Why doesn't this thread surprise me? As we sat watching this thing play out last night, I couldn't help but assume that Diamond and Jones were probably making notes to self while the speeches went on. Note to self: Update resume.

We may as well start with a clean house for 2009.

quote:

Originally posted by CovetedLakeEllyn:

I couldn't help but assume that Diamond and Jones were probably making notes to self while the speeches went on. Note to self: Update resume.

I don't know how it is with managers, but all an attorney needs is a client who is willing to pay his bills.