For the sake of clarity, and to help people understand the basis for some of the divisiveness on the Council-- in broad terms, a city charter essentially defines what a city government can and cannot do. The Code of Ordinances defines the manner in which provisions of the charter are put into effect. In the event of a conflict between these two documents, the charter trumps the code. With respect to the way meetings are conducted, the same relationship holds between the code and Roberts Rules of Order. In Video 1, I called for a point of order in accordance with section 2-89 of the code, which classifies a point of order as an incidental motion which may be introduced at any time during a meeting. As such, my point of order was not Out of Order. On the other hand, I believe Ms. Kautz's "Out of Order" call was a violation, not only. of the code, but of my rights as a member of the council (as stated in the code).
The above probably includes more information than most people want about parliamentary procedure, however, after reading them, I believe it's apparent that Ms. Kautz was again attempting to use her position as meeting chair to bully council members and to turn a procedural matter into an opportunity for political posturing.

Kautz is almost obsessed with using the phrase "Out of Order". It makes you wonder if she has been called "Out of Order" a lot in the courtroom when representing a client. Just wondering out loud.