I recommend that you cast a jaundiced eye at the next person who suggests that you take any vote characterized as a “straw poll” or any type of informal vote that could qualify for a standing invitation to the Annual Straw Poll Family Picnic And Restraining Order Renewal Breakfast.
Your own parliamentary authority describes straw polls as inappropriate:
A few organizations follow the improper practice of taking an informal test, or straw vote, in meetings, which they interpret to be a vote which is not binding...
No body, board, or committee can, during its meeting, properly take a vote that is not binding. ... under the law all votes taken during a meeting are binding. [emphasis added]
Sturgis, 4th edition, page 149
The so-called informal and non-binding “straw poll” taken at the Committee of the Whole meeting at Cornwall Church on April 12th was printed in the Herald:
...The resolution came after the council met Monday with the various parties that challenged the county's urban growth area update done last fall. The parties made presentations and stated their cases, and the council members took straw polls in favor of giving most of the petitioners what they wanted.[emphasis added]
“Whatcom Co. Council wants to restore growth areas removed last year”; Bellingham Herald; April 15, 2010; Jared Paben
I remind the members of the Whatcom County Council that, unlike a 4-H club or a condo association, your informal straw polls are prone to being published by the media.
As a municipal legislative body you are at the top of the food chain for parliamentary procedures. The next highest level of government is a State legislature. At that level of governance there exist specialized needs that go beyond the scope of procedures found in Robert’s Rules or Sturgis.
If any organization should be holding itself to minimum procedural standards, it is the Whatcom County Council. Taking an “informal” approach to procedure is entirely compatible with a professional level of attention to detail, so an argument defending such procedural slop as “straw polls” on grounds of “informality” will do nothing to address my concerns.
The County Council has begun this UGA settlement with an unusually timed meeting of a Committee of the Whole, which was held in a location that is not a routine or customary meeting place for any Council business, and included a “straw poll” that (if taken at face value) was procedurally out of order.
The avoidable and unnecessary absence of attention to detail with which this entire UGA settlement began has set a tone over the entire process that poses a subtle but perceivable threat to the legitimacy of any settlement that may be reached.
In terms of the potential implications of what such a lack of attention to detail can mean, spare a moment to consider the famous rock group Van Halen and their less famous, but nonetheless infamous, “no brown M&Ms” contract rider.
Van Halen has historically buried a rider deep inside of its standard performance contract which required that there be a bowl full of M&Ms backstage and that there must be no brown M&Ms in that bowl.
Seems silly to the point of being borderline childish, until you realize that the performance contract was over fifty pages long and the band could tell whether or not a venue has even bothered to read the contract just by glancing for a few seconds at a prominently displayed bowl of candy.
If there was a bowl full of M&Ms, without a brown candy shell in sight... that was accepted as evidence that the venue read the entire contract and complied with it. The band could focus on their performance without worrying that any details were missed.
However, if the venue missed that detail, it begged the question... what other details did the venue miss? Many of the clauses pertained to electrical needs and structural load demands. A few missed details could have sabotaged an entire concert performance or even posed a threat to the physical safety of everyone present.
The driving point here is that if the County Council can’t be bothered to pay attention to basic procedural details, it begs the question... how many other details are you missing on the UGA settlement? And if you are missing any, what will be the taxpayers’ first clue? A successful court challenge from the City of Bellingham?
A few missed details can sabotage all manner of County business. This is not limited to the UGA settlement process.
As the County Council, you can be “informal” and still show a professional level of attention to basic detail. But right now, you look like you can’t be bothered to do even that.
Getting your procedures right is the big bowl of M&Ms, minus the brown ones. By paying attention to basic procedural detail, you would be sending a reassuring message to everyone who witnesses you transacting the people’s business. They wouldn’t have to worry about whether or not you got the details right.
As things stand now, not only are you forgetting to insure that that there are no brown M&Ms... sometimes you are forgetting to insure that there is any bowl at all.
Please, no more “straw polls”, okay? It’s a big brown M&M that you need to take out of the candy bowl.
Cordially,
Shane Roth
Bellingham, WA
P.S. If you are curious, read the details about Van Halen’s “no brown M&Ms” rider at: http://www.snopes.com/music/artists/vanhalen.asp
No comments:
Post a Comment