►
From YouTube: Public Works Finance & Safety Meeting 07 01 2019
Description
City of Watertown, SD
A
A
B
A
Opposed
signify
by
saying,
nay
motion
carries
item.
4
is
council
consideration
to
reject
all
bids
for
the
2019
asphalt
patch
repairs,
project
number
1922
from
donek
inc
in
the
amount
of
100,
2550,
$2.99
and
I'll.
Look
for
a
motion
and
second
for
approval
of
that
I
have
a
motion,
my
bill
Hauer
and
a
second,
my
l'olam
and
like
heath
to
explain
this.
Thank.
C
C
He
is
started
or
initiated
a
quote
project,
but
is
bound
to
some
financial
limits,
as
with
any
quote
per
state
statute.
So
what
he
was
attempted
to
do
here
was
expand
the
scope
of
that
project
through
a
bid
for
the
same
type
of
work.
We
put
a
bit
out
in
the
hopes
to
obtain
about
a
$50,000
project
and,
as
you
can
see
on
the
agenda
item
title,
we
came
in
over
double
that.
C
C
Will
and
again
up
to
the
point
that
Rob
can
do
as
under
a
quote
which
is
up
to
$50,000
and
once
he's
maxed
out
on
that
I
believe
he's
about
halfway
through
those
funds.
At
this
point,
he's
done
about
twenty-seven
thousand
dollars
worth
work
and
it
doesn't
take
long
to
eat
through
the
rest
of
that
50
grand,
but
he
will
continue
down
that
path.
Right.
D
D
C
A
good
question
councilman
feel
our
I
believe
the
the
focus
of
this
patchwork
that
he's
got
quoted
now
and
what
the
focus
of
this
bid
would
have
been
is
larger
patches,
where
a
paver
his
ideal,
to
lay
that
asphalt
back
down
the
the
patchwork
that
the
street
crew
performs.
They
try
to
keep.
It
is
in
size
so
that
the
quality
of
the
preparer
is,
is
in
good
shape
and
and
not
you
know,
it
doesn't
impede
traffic
by
being
bumpy
or
rough,
or
things
like
that.
C
E
C
Absolutely
and
that's
another
great
question,
I
appreciate
you
asking
me
that,
because
this
is
something
we
talked
about,
what
the
what
the
contract
or
prior
to
the
meeting,
one
of
the
things
I've
proposed
a
next
year's
budget
that
I've
already
been
in
discussions
with
superintendent
bane
and
about
is
formalizing
a
large
patch
repair
contract
and
in
that
large
patch
repair
contract.
We
would
do
just
that.
We
would
identify
the
size
and
locations
of
certain
patches
throughout
town.
I
mentioned
that
to
donek
soothe
bid
was
from
here
and
they
agreed.
C
E
C
A
Any
other
questions
or
comments
all
right,
I'll
look
for
action,
all
those
in
favor
signify
by
saying
aye.
Those
opposed
signify
ever
saying,
nay,
motion,
carries
item
number
five
is
discussion
on
request
for
proposals
for
stormwater
utility
fee
and
structure
assessment,
and
this
is
just
a
discussion,
so
no
recommendation
here
but
I'll.
Let
Heath
explain
it.
Thank.
C
You,
madam
mayor,
so
as
the
council
is
well
aware
kind
of
the
heels
of
the
last
discussion
we
just
had
our
budgets
as
we've
gone
through.
The
bidding
season
this
year
have
have
been
tight
and
some
of
the
talking
points
that
have
come
out
of
those
discussions
on
bit
awards
and
bid,
rejections
and
reprioritizing
work
for
this
construction
season.
If
you
recall
some
of
those
discussions,
some
of
the
ideas
that
we've
had
and
planted
seeds
on
are
the
idea
of
implementing
such
sources
of
revenue,
such
as
a
stormwater
utility.
C
C
What
this
request
for
proposals
does
is
we've
sent
this
out
to
a
few
different
consultants
around
the
region
that
have
expertise
in
helping
establish
municipal
storm
water
utilities
through
the
preliminary
thought
that
the
engineering
office
has
given
this
and
through
some
internal
discussions
with
the
finance
office
and
the
mayor
and
the
attorney?
We
wanted
this.
The
idea
of
a
utility
to
be
put
forth
as
as
simple
as
possible
a
simple
model
built
if
the
council
were
to
subsequently
pass
this.
C
We
want
it
to
be
a
fairly
simple
model
to
be
put
forth
to
the
council
for
the
community
to
wrap
their
minds
around
and
clearly
understand,
and
so
that's
what
the
RFP
details
is
requesting.
Proposals
for
assistance
in
establishing
a
fee
and
structure
of
our
potential
storm
water
utility
and
the
deadline
for
receiving
these
proposals.
B
C
C
That
being
said,
what
that
obviously
does
is
free
up
other
general
fund
money
to
be
utilized
for
other
community
efforts,
whether
it
be
public
amenities,
Parks
and
Rec
other
street
repair
projects,
whatever
it
might
be,
you've
got
that
additional
general
fund
money
now
freed
up
to
allocate
towards
those
community
expenses
that
the
community
would
like
to
see
done.
So
generally
speaking,
yes,
I,
don't
know
from
a
legal
standpoint
if
we're
hun
percent
obligated
to
spend
them
on
that.
A
Thank
you.
We
have
numerous
enterprise
funds.
Already
we
have
a
sewer
utility
garbage
airport
is
a
enterprise
fund.
Then,
of
course
the
municipal
utilities
have
enterprise
funds
under
the
city,
so
we
use
them
in
the
same
way
and
likely
we
would
start
very
small.
With
this.
We
don't
spend
a
ton
of
money
on
stormwater
work.
It
seems
to
fall
to
the
back
and
that's
part
of
the
reason
for
doing
this.
We'd
have
dedicated
money
to
do
stormwater
projects,
so
it
counts.
Mccallum,
Heath,.
C
Know
I
I
did
anticipate
that
question,
but
I
don't
have
a
good
answer
for
it.
I
really
would
be
speculating.
We
have
not
talked
any
real
hard
numbers
with
any
of
the
consultants
that
we
sent
this
out
to
so
I'm,
anxious
to
see
what
those
will
come
back
as
proposals,
but
I
would
be
wild
guest
to
estimate.
You
know
what
it
would
be
in
tens
of
thousands.
E
F
C
That's
a
great
question:
councilman
Beeler,
so
there
are
several
ways
to
establish
the
stormwater
utilities
and
municipalities
do
it
differently,
depending
on
which
one
you're.
In
now,
when
I
talked
about
the
complexities
and
whether
we
want
to
keep
it
simple
or
get
real
complex,
those
calculations
you
asked
about
can
be
based
on
actual
percent
in
pervious
for
each
lot
in
town,
which
is
obviously
one
of
your
more
complex
ways
to
figure
this
because
of
the
detail
in
calculating
that
actual
impervious
area.
On
every
lot.
C
That's
that
the
concrete,
the
asphalt,
the
roofs,
the
rooftops,
the
shingles.
Everything
that
water
is
going
to
run
off
of
completely
is
the
impervious
area
that
gets
calculated
and
then
there's
a
calculation
that
gets
that's
formulated
and
then
each
property
is
assessed
depending
on
their
their
area
of
a
previous
Ness
or
their
percent
of
imperviousness,
based
on
their
whole
lot
area.
Now,
the
more
extreme
the
other
end
of
the
spectrum
is
just
do
a
flat
rate
like
in
residential
areas.
C
You
charged
a
flat
utility
fee
on
a
per
month
basis
throughout
the
year
for
X
amount
of
dollars
per
lot,
and
usually
you
know
those
dollars
can
range.
You
know
again
I'm
just
throwing
numbers
out
here,
but
anywhere
from
$2
to
$5
a
lot
per
month,
let's
say,
and
then
that
money
is
just
a
simple
fee:
that's
collected
as
a
stormwater
utility
fee
on
their
monthly
utility
bills.
So
it
really.
It
really
varies
on
how
that's
calculated
and
we
furred
internally
at
least
staff
discussions.
This
far
wanted
to
keep
it
as
simple
as
possible.
C
As
far
as
how
we
calculate
that-
and
that's
for
a
couple
reasons,
one
is
to
foster
some
clear
level
of
understanding
of
what
this
utility
is
and
how
it's
getting
assessed,
but
then
also
the
longevity
of
it.
We
don't
want
to
have
to
create
more
work
for
people
and
staff
that
we
don't
have
to
continue
to
calculate
changes
in
pervious
areas
over
the
years
to
continue
to
reassess
every
year.
What
percent
impervious
is
out
there
on
new
developed
areas
that
becomes
very
complex
and
a
staff
load
as
well
that
we
wanted
to
try
to
prevent.
D
Guess
I
want
to
follow
up
and
make
sure
I
understand,
Heath
and
mayor
your
response
to
Mike's
question
a
while
ago,
okay,
this
Ward
tonight,
probably
looking
at
Kristin
or
Matt.
Now
this
would
be
an
enterprise
fund
or
a
part
of
an
enterprise
fund.
You're
Chris
you're
shaking
your
head,
no
Kristin,
so
that
we're
going
to
it
would
be
going
in
the
general
fund,
then,
is
that
or
we
be
going
from
an
accounting
perspective.
G
I'll,
let
Matt
follow
up
when
I
point
out
a
couple
of
things.
We
actually
have
some
of
the
funds
in
both
the
general
fund
and
the
capital
improvement.
We
do
have
our
water
resources
in
the
general
fund
and
that
has
around
$60,000
budget,
but
then,
if
it
was
to
be
the
actual
project
that
would
sit
in
the
capital
improvement
fund,
so
I
would
say
to
Matt's,
probably
gonna
hit
on
the
restrictions
of
it,
but
we
would
probably
have
to
establish
a
kind
of
a
combination
because
it
does
have
two
funds.
That
kind.
H
A
Currently
have
a
lot
of
work
that
goes
into
stormwater
that
isn't
broken
out
at
this
time.
The
street
department
does
work,
the
sanitary
sewer
department
does
work
and
we
bid
projects
out,
and
parts
of
our
street
projects
include
stormwater
facilities.
Those
could
be
broken
out
and
a
lot
of
different
things
could
be
charged
into
this
fund
that
we
would
create
anybody
else.
Have
a
question
or
comment:
none!
Okay!
A
There
are
more
to
come
on
this.
Obviously,
the
first
step
is
just
to
see
what
the
consultants
have
to
say
and
study
it
and
we're
a
long
way
from
implementing
it.
Now
we're
just
looking
into
it
at
this
point.
So
the
next
item
on
the
agenda
is
presentation
on
parliamentary
procedure
by
Mark,
Roby
and
Mark
could
invite
you
to
come
up
to
the
podium.
A
I
asked
mark
to
do
this
because
we're
going
through
a
change
of
council
today
and
as
far
as
I
know,
I've
never
seen
this
done,
and
council
members
and
myself
to
just
take
these
seats
and
are
expected
to
understand
all
this
process
of
how
the
meeting
is
run
so
I
know
this
is
an
area
of
interest
for
Mark
and
we've
talked
about
it
in
the
past
and
he
knows
a
lot
about
this
subject,
so
he
graciously
agreed
to
come
and
give
us
a
lesson.
So
thank
you.
Mark.
I
Thank
you,
Mary
I
would
also
state
she
couldn't
find
anybody
else
to
do
it
now.
Couple
opening
remarks
kind
of
a
baseline
first
off
I'm,
not
an
expert
but
I
did
take
a
class
in
college
from
an
expert
and
I
did
stay
at
a
Holiday
Inn
number
times
to
my
remarks
are
based
on
this
little
Bible
Robert's
Rules
of
Order
switch.
You
subscribe
to
as
a
council,
but
you
act
differently
than
a
body
like
the
legislature,
legislative
bodies
and
others.
I
So
with
that,
as
a
backdrop,
I
can
tell
you.
These
are
the
four
things
we're
going
to
cover
six
real
basic
steps
of
which
the
first
two
are
difficult
to
apply
as
I
just
witnessed,
but
we're
going
to
talk
about
them
anyway.
We're
gonna
talk
about
some
basic
misconceptions,
which
really
point
to
using
parliamentary
procedure
is
a
slows
things
down
and
causes
problems
and
it
becomes
a
scapegoat.
And
yet,
when
you're
on
a
difficult
issue,
parliamentary
procedure
can
in
fact
make
it
more
efficient,
more
productive
and
better.
I
So
it's
it's
one
of
those
areas
that
we'll
have
maybe
some
discussion
on
that
and
then
third
we're
gonna
talk
about
the
abused
or
misused
motions,
either
intentionally,
which
is
very
rare
but
oftentimes
throughout
a
lack
of
knowledge
and
I'll.
Give
you
some
examples
and
then
we'll
talk
about
questions.
I
About
how
to
get
that
main
motion
on
the
floor,
we're
gonna
talk
about
debate
and
how
to
begin
the
discussion
of
debate.
We're
gonna
talk
about
how
to
amend
we're.
Gonna
talk
about
calling
the
question
on
emotion,
I'm,
tired
of
talking
about
it.
Let's
move
on
and
then
how
to
take
the
boat
and
how
to
interrupt.
I
can
say
the
first
two
are
a
little
bit
unique,
but
we're
gonna
talk
about
him
anyway.
I
So
first
off
in
your
rules,
the
mayor,
the
chair,
is
called
the
presiding
officer
and
so
that's
a
little
different,
most
organizations
just
a
chair
that
they
refer
to
and
most
of
Roberts
talks
about
that
in
his
book.
But
in
your
case
in
rule
5,
you
referred
to
as
the
presiding
officer,
but
you
have
adopted
Robert's
Rules
of
Order
as
your
standard
for
parliamentary
procedure.
So
somebody
makes
a
motion
often
than
not
it's
the
mayor
in
your
case,
but
at
other
meetings.
Somebody
from
the
floor
would
raise
and
I'd
like
to
make
a
motion.
Mr.
I
chair
or
the
presiding
officer
and
then
a
motion
is
made,
and
then
the
mayor
restates
the
motion
and
a
second
is
asked
for
by
the
mayor
or
the
chair
oftentimes.
You
guys
immediately
give
a
second.
The
key
point
on
this:
that
I'll
make
whether
you're
a
general
legislative
body
or
accounts
to
like
you
are
today
is
there's
two
misconceptions:
first
off
seconding
doesn't
mean
you
approve
of
it.
Seconding
just
means
we're
going
to
talk
about
it
and
oftentimes.
The
second
we'll
vote
against
the
motion,
but
thinks
it's
worthy
to
have
the
discussion.
I
Obviously,
if
there
is
no
second
there's
no
discussion
and
you
shouldn't
try
to
start
one.
If
it's
your
motion
but
I,
think
on
almost
everything
on
your
agenda,
there's
always
a
second
from
what
I've
seen
over
the
years
and
then
the
other
misconception
is
you
can
withdraw
a
motion
or
change
in
motion
and
you
do
not
have
to
ask
permission
from
the
second.
A
lot
of
people
think
you
do
because
the
second
might
have
been
against
your
motion
that
you
want
to
change
or
modify.
So
that's
the
first
step.
I
Is
you
get
the
motion
on
the
floor
which
the
mayor
does
just
a
few
minutes
ago
talking
about
those
individual
items,
then
the
general
discussion
begins
and
I
caution.
You
to
remember:
don't
ever
try
to
give
the
arguments
while
you're
making
a
motion
wait
till
there's
a
second
and
wait
till
it's
been
approved
for
floor
debate
after
the
second.
I
The
mayor
should
then
call
on
whoever
makes
the
motion
in
this
case
more
often
than
not
they'll
call
on
a
department
head,
especially
when
it
deals
with
streets
or
sewers
or
something
like
that
and
they
become
the
first
commenter
on
the
motion.
That's
on
the
floor.
The
best
way
to
do
it
is
to
pro
and
con
it.
So
then
you
look
for
somebody
to
be
on
the
con.
Then
you
go
back
to
the
Pro
and
the
con
and
in
legislative
debates
and
forums
that
works
well
in
your
case,
you're
asking
questions.
I
I
That's
on
the
council
before
you
allow
somebody
to
talk
to
or
three
times
you
want
to
get
a
multitude
of
ideas,
but
again
those
two
are
a
little
bit
more
difficult
in
the
way
you're
organized,
because
almost
every
time
mayor
Karen
makes
the
motion
hears
item
three
hears
item
four
and
calls
on
staff.
Often
to
make
the
comments
have
you
ever
made
a
motion
from
the
floor
that
isn't
on
the
agenda?
I
Anybody
and
I
don't
think
so.
Okay
amending
motions,
though,
is
something
you
do
every
meeting
you
see
something
up
there.
You
think
it
needs
to
be
changed,
and
so
you
talk
about
that.
The
key
here
is,
you
can
amend
a
motion.
One
of
your
items
is
ad
infinitum
as
many
times
as
you
want,
but
you
can
only
have
one
amendment
on
the
floor
at
a
time.
That's
so
key
I've
seen
people
try
to
do
that.
I
So,
if
you're,
if
you've
got
an
amendment
on
the
floor
and
another
amendment
comes
and
its
second
and
the
chair
immediately-
should
rule
that
out
of
order,
because
we
have
an
amendment
on
the
floor
to
deal
with
so
there's
three
types.
Pretty
easy.
Add
insert
consecutive
words
strike
consecutive
words
or
do
both
that's
how
you
make
amendments.
I
The
substitute
amendment
is
kind
of
an
interesting
one,
and
you
can
do
that
and
you
should
have
that
option
in
your
tool
bag.
When
you
look
at
substitute
amendment,
it's
where
you
vote
to
substitute
the
main
amendment
with
something
that's
different
and
then
it's
seconded
you
debate
that
motion
and
then
it
can
replace
the
amendment
on
the
floor
with
a
substitute
amendment
really
radically
changes
the
debate
that's
going
on
and
then
the
other
one
that's
miss
can
set
their
x'.
I
A
lot
of
misconception
on
is
that
we
can't
have
a
hostile
amendment
to
the
main
motion.
Yes,
you
can
as
long
as
you're
talking
about
taxes
and,
let's
just
take,
for
example,
we're
gonna
raise
taxes
is
the
main
motion
and
then
one
of
you
offers
up
amendment
to
not
raise
taxes
or
do
it.
1%
set
a
3%,
that's
a
hostile
motion
to
the
main
motion,
but
you
can
do
that
because
the
general
intent
is
germane
to
the
topic
at
hand,
which
is
taxes,
and
that's
so
important.
I
So
again,
if
the,
if
you're
talking
about
taxes
and
somebody
wants
to
talk
about
plumbing
rates,
the
mayor
would
want
to
call
them
out
of
order.
But
if
you're
talking
about
raising
taxes
and
then
you
vote
to
have
an
amendment,
that
would
say
no
we're
not
going
to
raise
taxes,
then
the
mayor
would
call
that
in
order
and
ask
for
a
second.
So
any
questions
on
amendments.
I
D
I
You
brought
that
up
so
so
a
motion
is
made
and
then
it's
made
and
then
you
move
to
amend
the
motion
and
it's
seconded
and
the
chair
gets
a
second.
Then
the
chair
would
ask
for
debate
on.
The
motion
should
turn
to
you,
because
you
made
the
amendment
motion.
You
should
speak
first,
then
she
should
look
for
anybody.
That's
opposed
to
the
amendment
they
should
then
speak.
Then
she
should
go
back.
Any
other
Pro
comments.
I
I
So
you
it's
it's
a
subsidiary
motion
to
the
main
motion:
zette
helped
make
sense:
okay,
okay,
everybody
clear
on
hostile
amendments
that
I
seen
people
get
their
noses
out
of
joint
on
that,
because
you
know
you
want
to
raise
taxes
and
the
person
next
to
you,
wants
to
cut
them
and
makes
an
amendment
to
your
motion.
That's
very
much
a
part
of
parliamentary
procedure.
It's
called
a
hostile
amendment.
I
Okay,
next
one
is
calling
the
previous
question
a
lot
of
people
just
say:
hey
I
call
the
question:
I.
Do
this
all
the
time
at
meetings
when
I'm
at
a
meeting,
because
I'm
I'm
ready
to
vote
you
know,
and
but
the
key
about
this
is
the
call.
The
question
is
one
of
those
power
tools
in
your
kit
when
you're
using
parliamentary
procedure,
and
why
is
that?
Even
though
a
seconds
required?
It's
not
debatable,
you
know
you
can't
say.
I
So
the
the
way
that
works
is
the
member
calls
I
moved
the
previous
question.
The
mayor
looks
for
a
second
second
is
made:
it's
not
debatable
if
approved.
It
ends
the
debate.
The
discussion
on
the
question:
if,
if
men
demand,
you
know
again,
it's
a
two-thirds
majority
vote
to
get
the
question
ended.
Then
you
go
to
vote
on.
The
main
motion:
does
that
make
sense?
Okay,.
F
I
I
Okay,
I'm,
assuming
all
ten
members
are
here,
so
that's
why
seven
out
of
ten
would
be
the
two-thirds
motion.
You
agree
with
that
number
Matt.
Okay,
then
it's
right!
Six
and
nine
five
of
eight
okay
mayor
question:
okay:
let's
look
at
the
next
slide
that
talks
about
the
next
step,
so
we're
done.
We've
called
the
previous
question
and
now
we're
going
to
call
for
a
vote
on
the
main
motion.
I
I
Oh,
it
was
an
amendment
or
what
you
know
or
which
amendments
bad
help
me
get
so
the
mayor,
the
mayor,
the
chair,
needs
to
I
think
restate
that
motion
and-
and
so
everybody
knows,
what's
going
for
it
and
then
you
need
to,
as
you
did
touch
I
compliment
you
on.
You
need
to
give
both
sides
of
the
fair
all
those
in
favor
signify
by
saying,
yea
or
yes
or
I,
and
then
the
same
for
those
opposed.
I
How
do
you
interrupt
okay?
The
questions
have
been
called
Bruce
and
you
want
to
interrupt
that
vote
because
you'd
like
to
discuss
it.
Some
more
well,
there's
three
ways
to
do
that
and
then
we'll
talk
about
some
other
ways,
because
there's
plenty
of
ways
to
do
it.
The
first
one
is
to
be
raised
to
a
point
of
information.
Mr.
mayor
or
miss
mayor
or
the
chair,
presiding
officer,
I'd
like
to
have
a
point
of
information.
I
The
mayor
would
stop
the
debate
and
the
discussion
at
that
time
and
turns
of
the
member
and
say
state
your
point
of
information
and
the
member
would
then
provide
that
and
then
the
mayor
would
make
a
ruling.
That's
a
those
are
done
under
procedure.
Are
we
gonna
vote
on
the
amendment
mayor
first
and
then
the
main
motion
and
the
mayor
would
say?
Yes,
we
are
okay,
thank
you
and
then
you
go
back
to
the
discussion
at
hand.
So
the
point
of
information
is
a
tool
in
your
hand,
baked
to
make
sure
you
know.
I
I
The
second
one
is
a
point
of
parliamentary
inquiry
and
again
it's
a
question
to
the
chair
concerning
concerning
procedure.
First,
one
was
content.
Now
we're
on
procedure.
I
made
a
mistake.
The
first
one
was
on
content
on
parliamentary
inquiry.
It
cannot
be
appealed
again.
The
chairs
answer,
the
mayor's
answer
and
opinion
is
finite.
So
when
is
a
procedure
in
it's
used
when
you
are
confused
as
I
was
on
the
first
point,
because
the
first
one
is
about
content,
this
one's
about
procedure,
so
you'd
rise
to
a
point.
I
A
parliamentary
inquiry
is
this
going
to
require
a
two-thirds
vote
mayor
or
just
a
simple
majority.
You
make
the
ruling
your
parliamentarian
may
have
to
correct
you,
but
that's
how
that
one's
handled,
but
again,
not
debatable
council
can't
override
the
chair
on
that
point.
The
third
one
is
the
one
that's
used
most
often
it
has
the
most
power.
It's
a
point
of
order
and
the
way
that
works
is
the
member.
The
council
member
would
rise
to
a
the
presiding
chair
mayor
I
rise
to
a
point
of
order.
You
don't
but
a
lot
of
legislative
bodies.
I
People
literally
get
up
from
the
chair,
I
rise
to
a
point
of
order,
and
that's
why
the
Robert's
Rules
calls
it
that,
but
you
can
just
simply
say
a
point
of
order
and
the
chair
would
then
look
at
the
member
and
say
state
state
your
point
of
order.
What
is
it
and
the
member
says
my
point?
Is
this:
it's
not
a
debate.
It's
a
statement
about
the
point
of
order.
I,
don't
think
we
ought
to
be
talking
about
taxes.
We
should
have
done
that
at
the
budget
meeting
mayor
I
think
this
is
out
of
order.
I
If
it's
well
taken,
she
then
can
go
on
and
do
something
else
to
bring
the
discussion
back,
and
maybe
we
throw
the
motion
out
at
that
point
or
she
can
say
the
motion
is
not
well
taken
and
that
ends
it
and
the
debate
goes
back
to
the
discussion.
However,
the
member
can
then
say
wait
a
minute.
I
want
to
appeal
your
decision
to
the
board
and
then
the
board
can
consider
it.
The
way
that
works
is
the
chair
would
give
your
reasons
for
why
point
was
not
well
taken.
I
I've,
never
seen
this
done
when
the
when
it's
been
a
good
point,
we'll
consider
it
it's
always
when
it's
not
well
taken
as
it
appealed.
So
the
chair
would
then
state
the
reason
for
why
it
was
not
well
taken
and
I
think
we
can
do
taxes
in
the
budget
meet
or
with
outside
the
budget
meeting.
Then
you
go
back
to
the
point
of
order
person
to
make
their
case,
and
then
you
allow
each
representative
to
talk
once
on
that
point
of
order.
Only
ok
and
then
the
chair
says
at
the
conclusion.
I
The
chair
then
gets
to
restate
again.
So
the
chair
gets
two
whacks
at
this
issue.
Point
of
order.
Everybody
else
gets
one,
and
then
the
chair
says
the
question
is:
shall
the
decision
the
chair,
the
mayor,
be
sustained?
Those
in
favor
of
sustaining
the
chair
say
aye
those
opposed
to
sustaining
the
chair
say
no,
and
it
takes
a
majority
of
vote
in
the
negative
to
overrule
the
chair.
Six
of
ten
questions
on
that.
I
Okay,
now,
the
basic
misconception
hit
on
this
earlier
is
where
we
blame
Robert's
Rules
and
these
seconds,
and
all
these
motions
and
point
of
orders
and
all
these
other
crap
from
getting
our
work
done
and
it
becomes
a
scapegoat
when,
in
fact,
and
members,
often
groan
and
complain
about
it.
Often
it's
just
because
they
don't
understand
parliamentary
procedure,
but
yet
I
found
that
those
that
know
parliamentary
procedure
know
its
power
and
as
a
result,
as
with
anything
with
power,
it
can
and
is
often
abused.
I
I
Emotions
past
the
vote
was
called
before
you
were
ready
to
vote
and
Bruce.
You
voted
on
the
majority
side,
even
though
you're
opposed
to
the
motion.
You
can
then
ask
for
that
motion
to
be
reconsidered,
because
you're
a
part
of
the
majority
on
that
vote.
On
the
other
hand,
if
you
were
part
of
the
minority,
you
cannot
ask
for
the
motion
to
be
reconsidered
and
that
sometimes
causes
people,
especially
on
voice
votes,
to
play.
I
I
D
Mark
maybe
explained
it
clearly,
but
even
which
okay
tonight
we
have
three
new
council
members
coming
on.
Let's
say
that
one
of
them
did
not
like
an
action
that
we
had
just
taken
even
even
just
a
few
minutes
ago
as
the
outgoing
council,
it
would
still
need
to
be
someone
who
voted
on
the
majority
to
bring
that
up
again.
Other
words,
one
of
the
new
members
could
not
do
it
correct.
Okay,.
I
This
motion
to
reconsider
has
higher
prescence
precedence
than
what's
on
the
agenda
next
or
what
you're
discussing
so
it
interrupts
the
standard
course
of
business.
That's
important
to
know.
Motion
to
reconsider
is
a
high
precedence
motion.
It
must
be
considered
immediately.
Then.
The
chair
can
say
well
I'll,
consider
your
motion
to
reconsider.
Once
we
get
through
the
budget.
No,
you
need
to
deal
with
it
at
that
time.
It
must
be
handled
immediately.
You
can
only
be
done
once
Bruce,
reconsiders
and
Don
wants
to
reconsider
than
Adam
wants.
We
do
it
once
on
emotion.
I
You
can
reconsider
at
once.
It
should
be
done
before
the
end
of
the
meeting.
The
same
meeting
that
the
main
motion
passes.
You
don't
want
to
wait.
Til
next
council
meeting
to
consider
it
reconsider
it's
a
majority
vote
only
and
there's
some
special
uniqueness
as
to
it
when
you're
looking
at
your
bylaws,
which
you
rarely
do
but
like
the
Home
Rule
Charter,
would
be
an
example
of
where
you
can't
reconsider
a
Home,
Rule
Charter
thing.
J
I
D
I
I
Technically,
you
should
do
it
at
the
same
meeting,
but
you
can
do
it
at
the
next
meeting
for
a
body
that
meets
at
least
quarterly,
and
you
certainly
do
you
meet
every
two
weeks
again
once
per
meeting
a
negative
vote
can
be
reconsidered
rescinded
you
cannot
undo
action,
that's
taken
so,
let's
say
last
meeting
we
decided
to
repave
the
road
out
in
front
of
mark
Robbie's
house
and
then
I
irritate
you,
and
so
then
you
make
a
motion.
The
next
meeting
and
they've
started
repaving
to
rescind
that
action.
I
And
look
at
the
next
line
without
with,
if
you
provide
advance
notice,
it's
on
the
agenda,
you
get
a
majority
vote
on
your
motion
to
rescind,
if
you
do
it
without
notice,
he
requires
a
two-thirds
majority
plus
you
have
that
risk
of
an
open
rules,
open
meetings,
violation
but
Roberts,
didn't
know
what,
when
he
wrote
this
back
in
18,
whatever
didn't
have
open
meetings.
So
that's
why
leaving
open
meetings
aside,
but
just
speaking
in
terms
of
total
Robert's
Rules
with
without
notice,
it's
a
surprise.
I
K
I
Correct
yep,
now,
I
Donna
tell
you
something
a
motion:
that's
a
surprise
to
rescind
again
you
just
when
Roberts
goes
to
the
two-thirds
majority,
there's
a
in
my
view.
There's
a
value
judgment
there.
It
ought
to
be
difficult
to
make
that
motion,
because
you
know
I
can't
attend
the
next
meeting.
You
know
darn
well,
I'd
vote
for
it
or
you
know,
vote
against
it,
whichever
side
it.
So
that's
why
Roberts
makes
it
that
more
difficult.
I
Okay,
all
right!
That's
that
now.
The
next
one
is
the
most
misused
made
motion
by
far
this
is
the
guilt.
This
is
the
one.
This
is
the
cat's
meow.
This
is
the
top.
This
is
the
one
the
motion
to
lay
on
the
table.
It's
a
table,
emotion,
I,
go
to
meetings
and
I,
see
people
do
this
and
it
just
grates
me
because
it's
like
man,
you
know
on
this
chalkboard
or
pick
your
favorite
one.
It
is
the
most
misused
motion
forever
and
Roberts
clearly
recognizes
that.
I
In
fact,
he
says
it's
a
violation
of
basic
principle
of
general
parliamentary
law.
Only
a
2/3
vote
can
rightfully
suppress
the
main
question
without
allowing
free
debate,
he
hated
the
motion
to
table,
and
he
said
so
in
his
in
his
various
editions
of
his
book.
What
lay
on
the
table
is
to
do
and
when
I
say
lay
on
the
table,
they
used
to
walk
up
to
the
clerk's
table
and
lay
it
on
the
table.
So
it's
a
table
emotion
same
way.
I
I
I'd
like
to
lay
it
I'd
like
to
table
this
motion
until
Bob
from
United
Express
arrives
here
in
ten
minutes:
okay,
the.
Why
is
this
motion
so
misuse?
Because
it's
not
debatable.
You
can't
debate
that
and
it's
a
simple
majority
to
pass.
So
whoever
makes
the
motion
in
that
very
short
sentence,
and
you
in
the
mayor
you'd
call
him
out
of
order
if
they
made
a
30-minute
presentation
on
the
motion
to
later.
You
know
it's
a
very
short,
concise
motion
or
reason
this
to
table
a
motion,
and
then
it
requires
a
majority
vote.
I
Only
you
saw
my
editorial
comment
and
I
professor
Ericson
told
us,
and
as
in
his
writings
and
in
his
various
manuals
that
he's
produced
on
Robert's
Rules
of
Order,
so
you
never
want
to
use.
The
motion
to
lay
on
the
table,
basically,
is
the
best
advice.
I
can
give
you
questions
on
the
motion
to
table.
It's
not
debatable
so
how
it
gets
used
since
I
know
parliamentary
procedure
better
and
everybody
at
the
table
as
I
make
a
motion
to
table
next
year's
budget.
I
You
know
and
I
get
a
second
and
then
one
of
your
two
you
want
to
start
debating
it.
The
mayor
has
to
call
you
out
of
order
and
you
could
throw
your
own
block.
That's
that's
malarkey,
you
know
I
mean
we
I
want
to.
We
can't
the
table
motion.
It
was
seconded.
Hopefully
the
majority
would
vote
against
it
and
with
this
admonition
that
you
should
never
use
the
motion
to
lay
on
table
next
time,
one
of
your
courts
uses
it
give
them
the
evil
eye.
I
I
The
main
motion
I
like
to
postpone
the
budget
for
next
year
because
I'm
against
it,
and
so
what
the
person
making
the
motion
does
uses
it
as
a
straw
way
straw
ballot
to
see
how
it's
going
to
vote
and
how
people
are
going
to
vote
on.
That's
probably
a
bad
example,
but
it
also
allows
because
it
is
debatable
that
you
can
discuss
the
main
motion
again
and
again
only
taught
here's
a
limitation
on
main
motions
on
amendments.
You
can
speak
a
lot.
I
The
best
thing
to
do
is
this
one
postponed
to
a
certain
time,
I'd
like
to
move
that
we
postpone
the
bike
path,
upgrade
project
till
next
meeting
and
the
reason
for
that
is
I've
got
some
information
coming
to
me
tomorrow.
That
I
think
will
allow
us
to
do
this.
For
maybe
half
the
price
of
what
we
got
in
the
budget
gets
a
second
and
then
turn
back
to
the
person
making
the
motion,
and
then
you
have
that
discussion
indefinitely.
Postponing
to
a
certain
time
creates
two
kinds
of
orders.
I
One
is
a
general
order
and
the
others
of
special
order.
A
general
order
requires
a
majority
vote
and
does
not
interrupt.
So
what
do
I
mean
by
that?
Well,
if
you're
doing
a
course
of
business
and
then
I
interrupt,
it
becomes
a
special
order
and
requires
a
two-thirds
majority,
especially
if
somebody
makes
a
motion
to
postpone
and
definitely
right
in
the
middle
of
your
presentation
on.
Why
you're
for
something
that's
a
special
order
and
requires
a
two-thirds
motion
if
it
interrupts
the
course
of
debate.
I
But
if
it's
done,
for
example,
right
when
Sarah
calls
for
the
question
and
then
somebody
says
wait,
a
minute:
I
want
to
postpone
to
a
certain
time,
because
I
have
some
new
information
that
does
not
interrupt
the
general
course
of
business
and
it
can
be
a
majority
vote.
The
the
chair
makes
that
ruling
whether
it's
a
special
or
general
order,
and
if
a
member
disagrees
with
the
chair,
that's
when
they
do
a
point
of
order
or
point
of
parliamentary
procedure
or
a
point
of
information.
That's
how
that
would
work.
I
D
I
I
J
We're
all
guilty
I
smell
a
memo,
sometimes
follow-up
questions,
so
we
may
have
somebody
in
the
chair
their
answers.
My
question
I
might
fire
one
or
two
more,
because
I've
got
momentum
and
really
I'm
sort
of
kind
of
getting
out
of
order.
The
way
we're
sitting
here,
I
can't,
look
and
see
everybody
all
the
time.
We're
focused
one
way
or
the
other
I
actually
wouldn't
mind.
I
I
would
gladly
die
have
that
on
my
notes,
but
I
would
recommend
using
a
gallon.
You
don't
have
to
pound
the
thing,
but
a
note
on
the
on
the
table,
especially
when
you're
making
a
declarative
statement
about
a
point
of
order
or
something
does
note
or
the
motion
passes
and
Rondon
the
next
item.
It
again
it's
one
of
those
things
on.
Do
we
really
need
to
do
that?
I
You
know
groan
and
moan,
but
the
fact
of
the
matter
is:
if
you
look
at
any
legislative
body
from
the
US
Congress
and
some
say
it
doesn't
work
for
it.
Well,
let's
use
our
South
Dakota
legislature
they're,
using
the
gavel
all
the
times.
The
gavel
can
be
misused
to
Lumumba
MoMA.
Has
they
gavel
down
the
speaker,
this
person
trying
to
speak?
You
know,
especially
on
a
point
of
order,
so
I
mean
it
can
be
abused,
but
most
often
99%
of
time
the
gavel
ADEs
the
deliberative
processes
and
makes
it
more
efficient
for
the
reasons.
E
E
I
A
I
They
can
they
can
yeah.
The
question
is
a
high
precedence.
Can
I
press
then
so
you're
doing
alternating?
You
know
procom
Pro,
questions
against
questions.
If
and
I
don't
know
if
you'll
ever
get
there,
but
but
that
the
question
can
be
called
any
time.
I
mean
you
can
make
the
motion
and
open
it
up
to
Heath
and
he's
talking,
and
somebody
can
interrupt
and
say:
I
call
the
question
you'd
be
rude,
but
they
could
do
that
and
then
you'd
ask
for
a
second,
because
you'd
assume
they're
not
being
rude
and
you'd.
Ask
for
a
second.
I
B
C
Could
you
address
what
Robert's
Rules
has
to
say
regarding
channeling
discussion
and
debate
through
the
chair
and
I'll,
explain
my
perspective
here,
I
think
from
this
board's
perspective
we
do
a
very
good
job
at
that
and
I'm
asking
more
for
my
sake
and
staffs
sake.
I
spent
the
last
seven
years
in
another
community
where
any
response
to
any
question
from
a
council
member
would
be
steered
back
through
the
chair,
not
actly
to
that
councilmember
yeah.
Could
you
elaborate
on
what
Robert's
Rules
say
to
that?
Well,.
I
He
he
would
approve
of
that
that
procedure.
That
would
be.
He
would
approve
that,
and
you
see
that
in
the
South
Dakota
legislature
in
committee
meetings,
when
I'm
in
a
committee
meeting
testifying
to
the
similar
kind
of
shape,
I
say
chair,
may
I
ask
a
question
of
you
know
or
somebody,
and
then
the
chair
says
we
you
allow
a
question
to
be
asked
and
then
the
question
is
asked.
So
everything
is
funneled
through
the
chair.
It
again
provides
for
ability
to
do
pro/con
better
more
order.
I
You
know
you
got
one
council,
member,
that's
really
hot,
on
an
issue
and
wants
to
spend
the
next
30
minutes
talking
about
it.
Nobody
else
gets
to
it's
a
way
to
control
that
kind
of
member.
If
that
were
to
ever
happen,
so
it's
certainly
possible
whether
you
want
to
adopt
that
kind
of
procedure.
It's
up
to
you,
but
Roberts
would
be
in
favor
of
that.
D
A
D
There's
certain
actions
that
we
take,
that
we
have
to
open
up
to
a
public
hearing
okay,
so
we
open
it
up
public
comments
and
then
we'll
close.
The
public
hearing
we
start
start
debating,
though,
amongst
ourselves
and
all
of
a
sudden
somebody
well
from
the
audience,
wants
to
come
up
again
and
mayor
I
know
you're,
you
quite
often
well
we'll
allow
the
public
hearing
to
be
reopened.
Well,
what
does
Robert's
Rules
say
about
that
situation
like
that?
Well,.
I
First,
off
you'd
make
a
motion
to
open
to
public
comment.
You
get
a
second
and
you'd
vote
and
then
you
allow
for
public
comment
at
some
point.
The
mayor
thinking
it's
over
the
time
limit
is
up
on
that
individual
you'd
call
for
an
end
to
the
public
comment
and
you'd.
Probably
vote
closed.
That
part
of
the
meeting
that
main
motion
and
it's
over
if
I
then
come
up
from
the
audience
who
want
to
talk
to
take
another
crack
at
it
I'm
out
of
order.
I
Now,
if
you
tell
the
citizen
they're
out
order,
they
get
a
little
cranky
about
that.
If
you
allow
them
to
talk,
you're
really
violating
the
spirit
of
fairness
and
procedure,
fairness
of
the
body
and
of
the
body
politic,
the
people,
as
well
as
the
procedure
so
I,
would
you
know,
figure
out
a
way
to
say
we
won't
you.
You
know
we.
We
aren't
allowing
any
more
public
comment
on
that.
If
you'd
have
shown
up
15
minutes
ago,
you
could
have
spoken
during
the
public
session
or
something
like
that.
Now.
F
I
I
would
do
is
every
time
you
gotta
know
what
I
would
do
is
I'd
say
the
way
I
would
handle.
That
is
exactly
what
he's
just
talked
about
safe
chair
I'd
like
to
ask
a
question
of
the
so-and-so
from
the
public
and
the
chair
then
could
rule
on
that
consideration.
It's
kind
of
a
point
of
point
of
information
which
is
about
content
and
the
chairs
ruling
carries
the
day.
So
without
saying
point
of
information.
That's
a
chair
I'd
like
to
ask
a
question
to
mark
Roby
and
parliamentary
procedure.
I
A
I
Can
do
that
when
it's
content
related
point
of
information
content
related
where
you
make
the
call
on
that,
but
any
time
you're
in
an
area
where
debate
will
be
forthcoming.
I
would
look
for
a
motion
because
see
when
you're
making
a
content
and
decision
on
your
own
there's
nothing.
Your
members
can
do
to
you
it's
your
call.
Now
you
can
make
a
decision
on
the
point
of
information
on
content
and
somebody
could
raise
to
a
point
of
parliamentary
procedure.
I
Call
you
on
that
and
then
they
get
to
take
a
whack
at
you
or
they
can
do
a
point
of
order.
I.
Think
public
comment
are
asking
questions
of
the
public
outside
of
the
public
meetings
out
order.
You
could
say
your
point
is
not
well
taken,
then
appeal
the
decision,
and
then
we
go
to
a
vote
of
the
council
and
we
handle
it.
You
know
what's
nice
about
that,
it
personalities
are
left
aside
because
there's
a
way
to
handle
it
very
orderly.
By
using
this
little
guide,
little
big
councilman.
A
J
Agree
with
what
you
said,
I
like
that
procedure,
but
I
think
we
all
can
fake
with
examples
where
you
know,
when
somebody's
down
here,
a
topic
that
there's
25
people
on
something
they're
really
emotionally
tied
to
the
issue.
They're
gonna
want
to
get
up
and
oftentimes.
We
see
if
they're
bouncing
up
back
and
forth
all
the
time
that
could
I
mean
I.
I
I
D
Does
does
Robert's
Rules
discuss
anything
about
how
to
conduct
an
executive
session?
Let's
say
that
we
legitimately
and
I
got
a
look
at
our
attorney.
Always
a
good
job
make
sure
we
stay
on
task
here,
but
as
far
as
procedurally
within
executive
sessions,
Robert's
Rules
say
anything
or
do
we
just
you
know
pretty
well
discuss
whatever
we
need
to
in
executive
session.
Well,.
I
Because
you
can't
take
action
in
executive
session,
Roberts
would
be
silent
on
executives,
say
personally,
I
believe
he's
against
him
I'm
making
that
up.
But
since
there's
no
action
taken
no
debate,
there
is
discussion,
but
there's
no
debate
or
public
discussion.
No
action
taken,
it's
he's
silent
on.
He
would
require
you
to
take
a
motion
to
go
into
executive
session.
You
need
by
South
Dakota
law
and
Robert's
Rules.
You
need
to
state
why
you're
going
into
executive
session
and
then
a
majority
vote
lets
you
go
in
there.
E
I
That's
really
a
City
procedure,
a
city
rule,
and
if
you
don't
have
that
spelled
out
and
your
rules,
you
really
should
again
it's
a
protection
of.
You
know:
I
elect
you
guys
to
be
efficient
and
conduct
business
and
I.
Don't
want
you
quitting
because
you're
having
72
hour
meetings-
and
you
don't
want
to
be
on
here
so
and
that's
what
you're
yeah
when
somebody
gets
up
and
makes
a
short
comment,
sits
down.
You
get
the
point.
You
really
appreciate
it
yeah,
but
when
somebody
gets
up
here
in
lectures
yeah,
you
know
it's
hard
for
tentative.
I
E
I
Really
ought
to
have
that
called
out.
I
think
spelled
out
in
your
rules
and
I.
Don't
think
you
have
that
spelled
out
and
many
cities
do
you'll
hear
the
mayor
start
a
public
session,
my
settlement
or
because
it's
a
hot
issue,
yeah
I'm
gonna
restrict
everybody
into
two
minutes.
Well,
why
don't
you
restrict
it
when
they're
talking
about
swings
at
the
park
last
week,
because
it
wasn't
a
hot
issue?
Well,
that's
a
pretty
poor
way
to
run
a
business.
E
I
E
I
You
should
do
it
every
time.
It's
like
gambling,
every
time
when
you
gavel
every
time,
then,
when
you
gamble
and
somebody's
irritated
about
a
motion,
it
doesn't
feel
as
bad
as
when
you
gambled
it
just
once
in
the
last
month.
You
know
you
do
it
consistently.
You
follow
the
procedures
consistently
and
you
really
will
become
more
efficient
in
a
better
body.
It's
it's
hard
getting
through.
It.
A
I
I
2021
when
that
changes
in
your
voting
member
of
the
body,
then
you
should
be
making
the
motion
just
like
the
other
six
members,
but
today
you're
in
a
non-voting
until
at
I'd.
Really
that
kind
of
emotion
should
come
from
one
of
the
council
members
but
lacking
that
the
chair
certainly
can
and
should
so.
I
I
Technically
a
year,
yes
and
technically,
you
should
have
the
question
called
vote
on
the
question
and
then
vote
on
the
motion
every
time.
That's
when
procedure
gets
to
be,
but
so
then
you
use
it.
Then
you
allow
somebody
to
not
call
the
question
on
a
big
heated
debate
and
you
end
debate
and
go
to
a
vote.
You
know
I
mean
it's
that's
when
it
I
think
you,
the
yin
and
the
yang
you
get
kind
of
conflicted,
can't
got
to
do
one.
The
little
things
you
ought
to
do
on
the
big.
H
I
Again,
the
chair
should
never
ask
for
the
question
right.
The
chair
can
recommend
I.
Think
we're
done.
Let's
go
to
a
vote.
It's
the
members
tool.
That's
your
gavel!
I'm!
Tired
of
this
discussion
call
the
question
mayor
mayor
says
a
second.
Second,
all
those
in
favor
calling
any
debate
calling
the
question
I
posed
same
sign
motion
carries
let's
go
to
a
vote
on
the
motion.
So
yes,
good
point,
man,
I.
I
A
The
next
item
on
the
agenda
is
old
business.
Is
there
any
see?
None
move
on
item.
Eight
is
new
business.
Is
there
any
new
business
not
seeing
any
item?
Nine
is
executive
session
pursuant
to
STC
l1
25
and
we
have
no
reason
to
go
into
executive
session.
So
look
for
motion
to
adjourn
motion
by
l'olam
ii
by
y,
all
those
in
favor
signify
by
saying
aye,
all
those
against
say.
No.