Boot Motions » Council meeting 22 June 2011 - WorkBoot dig #5
Moved Larsen That the Chief Executive provide Council with an itemised report on the costs to date of the district plan review, including debt servicing, staff time, and all related legal costs including the costs of defending the EDS appeal by 8 July 2011.
It is important that Council is advised of the costs of the project so as to be in a position to assess the ongoing liability of continuing the project.
Reasons given by Mayor for refusing -
3.3.2 Chairperson to decide and 3.10.2 Refusal of notice of motion
This information is publicly available through previous resolutions of Council.
My analysis
3.3.2 Chairperson to decide states -
“The chairperson is to decide all questions where these standing orders make no provision or insufficient information, and all points of order, and any member who refuses to obey an order or ruling of the chairperson shall be held guilty of contempt (see Standing Orders 3.1.1, 3.13.6 and Appendix C)”
This is irrelevant as the Standing Orders make clear provision for the rules of notices of motion at section 3.10.
3.10.2 Refusal of notice of motion states –
The chairperson may direct the chief executive to refuse to accept any notice of motion which:
(a) Is disrespectful or which contains offensive language or statements made with malice; or
(b) Is not related to the role or functions of the local authority; or
(c) Contains an ambiguity or a statement of fact or opinion which cannot properly form part of an effective resolution, and where the mover has declined to comply with such requirements as the chief executive may make; or
(d) Is concerned with matters which are already the subject of reports or recommendations from a committee to the meeting concerned.
Reasons for refusing a notice of motion should be provided to the proposer.”
The Mayor claims his reasons for refusing the notice of motion as –
“This information is publicly available through previous resolutions of Council.”
The reasons given do not accord with any of the reasons allowed under clause 3.10.2
(a) It is not disrespectful and does not contain offensive language or statements made with malice; and
(b) Is related to the role or functions of the local authority; and
(c) Does not contains an ambiguity or a statement of fact or opinion which cannot properly form part of an effective resolution, and where the mover has declined to comply with such requirements as the chief executive may make; and
(d) Is not concerned with matters which are already the subject of reports or recommendations from a committee to the meeting concerned.
Therefore no valid reason has been given for refusing notice of motion 6.
Furthermore I am not aware of any publicly available previous resolution of Council detailing “debt servicing, staff time, and all related legal costs including the costs of defending the EDS appeal”