A proposed amendment to the North Whidbey Park and Recreation District’s bylaws, which first saw the light of day in April, will remain where it began — on the table.

The district took no action at its monthly meeting July 20 on a proposed change to its bylaws that would alter the district’s voting policy.

According to the district’s bylaws, a two-thirds majority vote is required for all district actions. Due to the commission’s makeup of five people, this means a vote must have four votes in order to pass.

Commissioner Tom Johnson had raised concerns over the voting procedures not following accordance with Robert’s Rules of Order, a system of rules regarding meeting conduct. Johnson has alleged, however, that votes have passed by a margin of 3-2.

Johnson declined to comment on the amendment.

“There is a problem with how many commissioners are required to vote positive on an issue,” Commissioner Harvey Prosser said. “It rather hinders business when it requires a four-to-one vote.”

Commissioner Brien Lillquist said the necessity of the large number of votes needed to pass a motion has not hindered the district. Two members of the district are in favor of switching to a simple majority for most of the district’s business.

“They can’t point to any one specific item that’s been held up,” he said. “The tennis facility probably would have gone through a little bit earlier if (the bylaw) wasn’t there.”

Lillquist said he supported the super-majority vote because it showed solidarity within the district.

“I like the the idea because it makes sure almost all of the board is in favor of it,” he said.

Prosser said the issue would not be as difficult as it is if the commission had more members, but since the fractions require the large majority of people to vote for a motion, some motions are not presented for a vote at all. If 15 people were on the board, the two-thirds majority would be easier to get, he said.

An example of this is an attempt to clarify the authority the chair of the commission has to seek legal counsel when a question of policy arises. Currently, the district has an unwritten understanding that the chair can seek legal counsel without the permission of the rest of the commissioners, Prosser said.

Prosser moved to reaffirm the chair’s ability to consult with the lawyer, but after lengthy arguments about the subject, he withdrew his motion from the floor. He said it became obvious to him that he did not have the super-majority of the commissioner in support of the motion.

At press time, commissioner Fred Henninger did not return phone calls to comment.

The chair of the district, Janet Sabalausky, said the debate was a disagreement of semantics.

“When you get a written legal opinion, it costs money,” Sabalausky said. “The board has opted for verbal legal opinions or advice. The majority of time, the chair is gathering information to make the meeting run more smoothly.”

Prosser said the solution for a lot of the board’s conflicts would be to adopt the majority-rules guidelines.

“It’s a problem that needs to be straightened out,” he said.

The obstacle to the switch is that it would require the current two-thirds vote, which Prosser said is unlikely to happen.

“That’s the problem with this two-thirds majority, it’s very easy to defeat something,” Prosser said.

You can reach News-Times reporter Eric Berto at eberto@whidbeynewstimes.com.