If this bill passes (which I really hope it does):
If a councilor wishes to nay a bill, they must give a reason as to why they nayed the bill. The reason does not have to be longer than 5 words. It has to be a proper sentence which formally and properly describes what motivated them to vote nay. They are allowed to copy the same reasoning as someone else as long as it makes sense. (Aka they can do the [2] thing as long as it follows the rules above.) The reason must also be relevant to the bill. You can't say, for example,"Nay. I'm not in a happy mood."
If a councilor DOES give a reasoning such as that, their vote is voided and must revote again.
If a councilor believes that another councilor's reasoning is against these rules, they must notify the Deputy Mayor, or the Mayor, and they will evaluate and decide whether or not their vote should be voided.
If a councilor votes aye, then there does not need to be a reasoning.
The purpose of this is to allow constructive criticism and share the point of view of all the councilors. If a councilor votes aye, then they agree with the bill. If they vote nay, then this rule will allow the presenter to understand any points of concern, any mistakes, clarification issues, or understand what needs to be changed about the bill to make it better for everyone. There is no negative to this bill.
Unknown ATRer and pretty chill GFXer |