Sorry, you need to enable JavaScript to visit this website.
Article Image Alt Text

Daily Record file photo

City council discusses items on meeting rules

Thursday, March 24, 2022

The San Marcos City Council had a lengthy conversation regarding three agenda items that included the use of Robert’s Rules of Order during council meetings, current city council rules of decorum and being at the dais during meetings. 

Councilmember Jude Prather first talked about the item on Robert’s Rules of Order. Prather brought up that oftentimes, agenda items can go for a long period of time, making the meetings last longer. 

Prather suggested that after councilmembers speak on an item for 30 to 60 minutes, they should then be timed or be limited to speaking two more times before moving on. 

“Our goal for when we come up here on the dais is to come here, make our case, say our peace, vote yea or nay on an agenda item,” Prather said, “But I feel like sometimes we’re just you know, circling back and forth and we’re not moving forward and trying to close that agenda item and I think probably the best  way to do that is to enact some type of Robert’s Rules of Order when agenda items are taking a significant amount of time.”  

Councilmember Shane Scott agreed with Prather’s idea of time limits and further highlighted how council should come to meetings prepared and how these would make the meetings more efficient. 

Mayor Jane Hughson said time limits would not work with her reasoning being that speakers would interrupt each other further complicating the time limits. Hughson added that limiting the number of times a councilmember could speak would be hard to keep up with, with seven members of council. 

Hughson went on to talk about her experience serving with council over the years and the importance of coming to meetings prepared and concise, further asking the council if they “believe in personal responsibility.” 

“If you want shorter council meetings, please look in the mirror first and think about how you can be a responsible councilmember,” Hughson said. 

Councilmember Maxfield Baker voiced that Robert’s Rules of Order is a form of oppression and brought up a past heated exchange between him and the Mayor, which in turn caused another exchange between the two. 

Baker brought up that the mayor said she would have removed him from council if he were in the chambers, the Mayor interrupted to correct Baker saying that she would have removed him from the council chambers. 

“Way to split hairs and interrupt me and make the meeting longer,” Baker said. 

Councilmember Alyssa Garza focused her points on her perception that there is a lack of equal application of rules and norms. 

“I think sometimes what adds to like, the heated debate or it kind of triggers within us this need to go on and to keep repeating oneself and to keep honing in their message is that, I guess like at some level some kind of resentment or anger towards the rules not being applied across the board,” Garza said. 

Garza added that in her perception, the mayor allows some councilmembers to speak out of terms without reprimanding. Garza also brought up an example of her video camera and how the Mayor has previously talked to her about having it on during meetings, but not others. 

Garza also addressed the agenda item on decorum by questioning the current rules and guidelines and when they were made. 

Councilmember Mark Gleason voiced that he could not support anything that limits discussion in anyways during meetings and talked about the importance of councilmembers being together at the dais during meetings. 

“I think the big part is we’ve kind of gotten away from the humanization side of things,” Gleason said. “Look, we break bread together between our meetings, we sit by, side-by-side we remember that we’re human beings and I think that’s extremely important for the community and for how we handle ourselves.” 

Baker explained that he still joins the meetings via Zoom due to him worrying about losing Zoom access for staff, councilmembers and citizen comments. Baker also addressed Gleason’s comments regarding humanization. 

“One of the last times I saw him in person he directly … I’m trying to think of the right words, I’m just going to say what he said, he called me a fruitcake and told me to ‘skip right off’,” Baker said. 

Gleason denied these claims, saying he had witnesses, Baker said the same thing. 

“I have tried to make it very clear that when you feel disrespected it’s because I am reflecting the level of disrespect that I am feeling,” Baker said. 

Prather and Hughson further emphasized that the dais item isn’t intended for the Zoom option to go away completely. 

Garza made a  point about how the council should participate in facilitative training and how she previously tried to make that happen in the past. 

Hughson then talked about personal attacks during discussion and how council should enforce rules to stop them. To this, Baker questioned what can be considered a personal attack and had concerns on how this could impact on who can be stopped from voting on an item due to one’s perception of a personal attack. 

Gleason further mentioned that Baker not being at meetings in person hurts the meetings and is looking forward to the time when all of the council can be together. 

Councilmember Saul Gonzales agreed that the Zoom option is beneficial for citizens and those who cannot be at the meetings. 

“The city needs to see us united, not only us but the key players from the city staff have to be here, they’re the leaders as well and I think they should be here representing our city as well,” Gonzales said. 

According to Baker, there is a multitude of reasons why the Zoom option is necessary with one being the risk of COVID-19. 

“If you all want me there, wear a mask, wear a mask out of respect for me, that’s all I’m asking,” Baker said. 

As Baker and Gleason began to disagree further in terms of council being together, Hughson made a point to put some feelings aside to work with others. 

While there was no action taken on these items, the council went around the table to voice what they agree and disagree with and any other ideas related to these items. 

Garza was in favor of the facilitative retreat or training but was unsure about any sort of speaker time limit during meetings. Garza also did not agree that councilmembers should be at the dais during meetings.  

Prather stood by his suggestion that after 30 to 60 minutes of speaking, speakers should be put on a time limit. Prather also was in favor of the retreat and that council should be at the dais. Scott agreed with the same three suggestions. Baker agreed with the retreat as well along with no time limit for speakers and for councilmembers to refrain from interrupting others while speaking. 

Gonzales also agreed with the retreat and Prather’s idea of a time limit and that councilmembers should be at the dais. Gleason did not agree with a time frame but did agree with the retreat and all members of council being at the dais. All councilmembers also agreed to make use of the call to question tool, as part of Robert’s Rules of Order, in order to end discussion and vote on an item. 

Prather and Baker agreed to work on two policies on rules and suggestions for executive sessions and regular meeting Zoom opt-ins. 

For the complete meeting and agenda, visit http://san-marcos-tx.granicus.com/ViewPublisher.php?view_id=9. 

San Marcos Record

(512) 392-2458
P.O. Box 1109, San Marcos, TX 78666