A debate over sewage-grinding pumps evolved into a parliamentary procedure battle between the Oak Harbor mayor and council during a Wednesday council meeting.

Mayor Scott Dudley has only five months remaining on the job and will be out much of that time after undergoing complex back surgery at the end of the month.

Nonetheless, the bad blood that’s existed between the mayor and council since he took office continues to generate verbal skirmishes.

Ultimately, nothing changed for a neighborhood that’s facing the prospects of being forced to hook into a unique sewage system in two years.

COUNCILMAN JOEL Servatius unsuccessfully tried to prevent Dudley from speaking at length on the issue of grinder pumps and chastised him for “being completely condescending and disrespectful” to Councilman Jim Campbell.

Afterward, Dudley said he didn’t feel that he acted inappropriately, but conceded that he’s in a lot of pain from the back injury and was frustrated that the council’s solution to a nine-year-old problem was to study it once again.

“Councilman Campbell doesn’t need anyone to speak for him,” he added. “He has no problem speaking for himself.”

DUDLEY REVIVED the unresolved controversy regarding a low-pressure sewer system that the city installed in the waterfront neighborhood previously known as Dillard’s Addition.

Nine years ago, the city built the system in the neighborhood — where homes are largely on septic systems — after only notifying a select few.

Many of the residents were up in arms because they didn’t like the low-pressure system or the city’s plans to force them to buy grinder pumps and connect to the system.

Dudley said he was pushing an ordinance to resolve the issue at long last. It would allow the city to purchase and install grinder pumps in public right-of-ways as part of its public system.

THE PARLIAMENTARY battles began after Campbell made a motion to resolve the issue by putting together a strategy meeting.

In response, Dudley started talking about the history of the grinder pump saga.

Servatius interrupted with a point of order, but Dudley continued his comments, arguing that the grinder pump issue in the Dillards neighborhood is separate problem from all the other homes in the city that are on septic tanks.

The city is forcing the residents to connect to the sewer system by the end of 2017, he said.

After Campbell tried to clarify his motion, Dudley twice interrupted him and questioned his understanding of the issue.

Councilwoman Tara Hizon called a point of order, saying that the council understood what Campbell was saying and that Dudley’s clarification was irrelevant.

As Dudley was speaking, Councilwoman Beth Munns also made a point of order, claiming that “when there’s a motion on the floor, it needs to be called for the question. Period.”

Dudley objected.

“It doesn’t need to be called for the question until you call for the question,” he said.

So Munns called for the question, which is a motion to end a debate and vote.

DUDLEY WAS starting the voting process when Councilman Danny Paggao raised another point of order, saying that the council has to vote on whether to call for the question.

Dudley showed his irritation.

“No, that’s not how it works and you should know that,” he said, shaking his head.

Then the mayor and Servatius disagreed about what “calling for the questions” means.

“I won’t read into why Ms. Munns called for the question,” Servatius said, speaking to the mayor.

“I’ll speak only for myself, that if I was to call for the question I was just probably tired of watching your body language that was being completely condescending and disrespectful to Mr. Campbell.”

The council’s rules on “calling for the question” are not completely clear. The written policy states that “the Mayor may close debate after a call for the question has been made by a council member and no one objects to closure.”

It also states that the mayor cannot close debate as long as any council member desires to speak.

The rules don’t say whether council members have to immediately object to the closure or if it’s too late after the mayor begins the voting process.

Paggao was correct that “the Standard Code of Parliamentary Procedure” does require a second and a vote to close debate, but the council’s adopted policy is slightly different and doesn’t require that step.

IN THE end, the issue remained unresolved. Campbell’s motion failed in a 2-5 vote.

Almberg made a motion to move on to the next agenda item, prompting the mayor to say that it was unnecessary.

The motion passed unanimously.

During an interview after the meeting, Campbell said he believes Dudley was irritated with him because he didn’t support the proposed ordinance. He said both Servatius and Munns apologized to him for the mayor’s behavior.

Campbell said he wasn’t upset by the debate; Dudley’s “way of doing things” is to go on the offensive.

“My way is to quiet down and listen to what both sides have to say,” he said.