Robert's Rules on Adjournment

At the most recent council meeting, Mayor David Lanman adjourned the meeting as soon as the agenda item for "ADJOURN" came up. He does this every meeting. The gavel comes down as soon as they come to Adjourn. In the most recent case, a citizen was on her way to the podium to make another statement in Citizen Comment period. This citizen happened to be the wife of a council member, and the mayor may have feared a critical comment (her intentions were not critical we learned later). Council members objected to the immediate adjournment and pressed for her right to speak. The mayor refused to back down, claimed he had the power to adjourn, took his gavel, and strode from the room in anger.

I went to the web site, www.robertsrules.com to see if I could find any information on this parliamentary procedure. They have a question and answer forum. A quick search of "adjourn" presented many opinions from experts, all along the same line. The short answer is that the mayor as presiding officer does NOT have the power to unilaterally end a meeting. Adjournment must be unanimous by consent (no objections) or by majority vote. Here are some points from that Q&A forum:

KEVIN asked:
IS IT NECESSARY TO ASK FOR A MOTION FOR ADJOURNMENT OR CAN THE CHAIRMAN ADJOURN THE MEETING ON HIS OR HER OWN?

JDStackpole said:
If there is no more business - and the chairman should ask - the chair can (and should) adjourn the meeting. Likewise if the building is on fire, etc. But he cannot do so in the face of an objection, and especially cannot do so "on his own" perhaps because he doesn't like what the meeting is doing. Adjourning a meeting is, officially, a decision of the majority voters, not the chair alone.

James said:
It is not necessary that a motion to adjourn be put to the assembly as a question. The most common form of adjourning a meeting without a motion is using a form of unanimous consent. A presiding officer may say, "Hearing no objection, the meeting is adjourned." or "Without objection the meeting is adjourned."

To a related question, JDStackpole said:
He cannot adjourn the meeting unilaterally. It does require a motion or at least unanimous consent. Next time, just stay put, let the Vice-chair start presiding (or anybody else you select if the Vice isn't there or you don't have one) and finish your business.

To another related question, JDStackpole said:
Whether a meeting adjourns is up to the members present - by majority vote, or "unanimous consent". But if the president says "This meeting is adjourned" and all the members just shrug and go home, that amounts to unanimous consent. What you should do, is just stay put and continue the meeting. If the President leaves, that's his/her problem.

Bill said:
If the President does leave and the meeting continues, as it should, the VP would preside if he's present and if not the assembly would elect someone to preside for the rest of the meeting.

So it seems clear. The mayor can adjourn the meeting by unanimous consent only if there are no objections, otherwise, it is not unanimous. He can also ask for a motion, second and vote or simply say, "Without objection the meeting is adjourned." If an objection is raised, he is required to hear the objection. If he takes his gavel and storms out, the meeting continues and the mayor pro tem is in charge. The mayor pro tem can hear the objection and ask for a motion, second and vote.

Let me show how the proper procedure should have gone in this situation.

Mayor: "Any more citizen comments? OK, then I call this meeting adjourned." But if a citizen has their hand up to make a comment and the mayor does not notice or chooses to ignore, a council member can object.

Council member: "I object to adjourning the meeting. Another citizen wants to comment."

Mayor: "I adjourned the meeting. That is my power. That's that," and leaves.

Mayor Pro Tem: "The presiding officer has left the meeting before proper adjournment. As mayor pro tem, I will continue the meeting as presiding officer. The council recognizes the citizen."

Citizen: "Thank you chairman, My name is... I would like to say..."

Mayor Pro Tem: "Thank you for the comment. Do we have any more citizen comments?"

Mayor Pro Tem: "The next agenda item is to adjourn. (Pause.) Is there any other business? Hearing no objections, this meeting is adjourned." Alternatively, the mayor pro tem could ask for a motion, second and vote to adjourn. This would be proper if there was any hint that adjournment was not a unanimous sentiment of the council. This is the correct thing to do. It is also polite.

Leo Salgado is our mayor pro tem and is a level-headed man. Our mayor is unaware of Robert's Rules of Order. This situation is just another example of his desire to grab as much power as possible. He uses his power as presiding officer to restrict participation in council meetings by both citizens and council members. His behavior is impolite and uncivilized. On a playground, he would be called a bully. Let's remember the rules next time this mayor loses his temper, takes his gavel and goes home. Mayor Lanman reads this blog, so I imagine this problem will be resolved at the next meeting. If not, I trust our council to follow the rules that our mayor does not follow.