So an update on this morning's tidbit on City Council, the discussion was tabled because the 4 members of council whose legal bill is in question, left the room. This had the effect of not leaving a majority for or against the measure to refund the money. Depending on wether you take the Post-Gazette or Bram's word on it... The 4 council members who asked to have their legal bills paid either deliberately tabled the discussion by leaving or were so scared that anything they did in the room would be viewed as a conflict of interest that they fled the room.
Either way this whole bit of shenanigans amounts to a big waste of time. I can understand conceptually why parlimentary procedures must be so rigid. They Ensure that in times of extremely heated debate everyone plays by the rules. However, this is rediculous, we've been talking about this for weeks. I say we (unoffically) lock council and the solicitor up in an office and work out a compromise that's both fair and reasonable. Then have everyone leave the room and sign it in their official capacities. I'm 100% aware that that is not the way things work, I'm just saying, wouldn't it be nice?
1 year ago