Committee of the Whole/Recommendations from Committee

[Emily T]

These questions have been puzzling me for a while (read: people where I work disagree with me and I want to prove I'm right) and I would love to hear from the wisdom of the group!

1. City Council goes into committee of the whole to discuss something important as a group and where it didn't start at a committee ... let's say to adopt an ordinance prohibiting gum chewing in the City.  My understanding of committee of the whole is any action taken during committee of the whole is advisory only - so the Council can't formally adopt the ordinance in committee of the whole.  Instead, if they want to formally adopt the ordinance, there would be a motion to rise and report and go back into regular session and then, once back in regular session, someone could make a motion to adopt the ordinance.  Or am I missing a step?

2. A proposed ordinance banning squirrels in the City is on for discussion at a City standing committee.  None of the committee members likes the idea so someone makes a motion to recommend Council deny the ordinance.  Is this proper? Or does the motion need to be a motion to recommend Council approve the ordinance and then all of the committee members vote no on the motion? 

3. Same setup as question 2 above, where there is a negative recommendation out of Committee (either a recommendation that Council deny the proposed ordinance or a failed recommendation to adopt the ordinance) - does the item still need to go to Council? I say yes, because Committee can only make a recommendation to Council - ultimately it's up to the Council.  It would be different if the motion failed for lack of a second, etc.  

Thank you!

[George Mervosh]

1) I think that's a pretty good summation of it.

2 & 3) I think the two best options are - reporting that the committee offers no recommendation on the matter, or recommending the council go on record as denying the proposed ordinance. The committee, by a majority vote, can decide the best course of action here.  Recommending that the council adopt something the committee is not in favor of is not a good idea, in my opinion, because they may end up adopting it based on that recommendation.

[Josh Martin]

1 hour ago, Emily T said:

1. City Council goes into committee of the whole to discuss something important as a group and where it didn't start at a committee ... let's say to adopt an ordinance prohibiting gum chewing in the City.  My understanding of committee of the whole is any action taken during committee of the whole is advisory only - so the Council can't formally adopt the ordinance in committee of the whole.  Instead, if they want to formally adopt the ordinance, there would be a motion to rise and report and go back into regular session and then, once back in regular session, someone could make a motion to adopt the ordinance.  Or am I missing a step?

This is correct.

1 hour ago, Emily T said:

2. A proposed ordinance banning squirrels in the City is on for discussion at a City standing committee.  None of the committee members likes the idea so someone makes a motion to recommend Council deny the ordinance.  Is this proper? Or does the motion need to be a motion to recommend Council approve the ordinance and then all of the committee members vote no on the motion? 

The motion to recommend that the council deny (or defeat) the ordinance is proper. If a motion to recommend that the council approve the ordinance was defeated, the result would be that the committee made no recommendation.

1 hour ago, Emily T said:

3. Same setup as question 2 above, where there is a negative recommendation out of Committee (either a recommendation that Council deny the proposed ordinance or a failed recommendation to adopt the ordinance) - does the item still need to go to Council? I say yes, because Committee can only make a recommendation to Council - ultimately it's up to the Council.  It would be different if the motion failed for lack of a second, etc.  

If a committee makes a motion to recommend that the council deny a proposed ordinance, the item does go to Council.

What happens in the latter case depends on how the motion came to the committee. If the committee is considering this matter on its own initiative, then no motion would be brought to the council by the committee, although a council member could certainly raise the matter himself. If the ordinance was referred to the committee by the council, then the ordinance (along with the committee’s lack of recommendation) would be reported back to the council.

51 minutes ago, George Mervosh said:

Recommending that the council adopt something the committee is not in favor of is not a good idea, in my opinion, because they may end up adopting it based on that recommendation.

My understanding is that the suggestion was that a member of the committee make a motion to recommend adoption of the ordinance, and that this motion would be defeated in committee.

[George Mervosh]

Just now, Josh Martin said:

My understanding is that the suggestion was that a member of the committee make a motion to recommend adoption of the ordinance, and that this motion would be defeated in committee.

Thanks, I thought she was referring to the council.

[Emily T]

You guys are awesome - thank you!

[Joshua Katz]

11 hours ago, Emily T said:

2. A proposed ordinance banning squirrels in the City is on for discussion at a City standing committee.  None of the committee members likes the idea so someone makes a motion to recommend Council deny the ordinance.  Is this proper? Or does the motion need to be a motion to recommend Council approve the ordinance and then all of the committee members vote no on the motion? 

 

It may or may not be the case for your jurisdiction, but in many jurisdictions government bodies are required by various laws to make motions to not grant/deny permits of various sorts.

[Josh Martin]

10 hours ago, Joshua Katz said:

It may or may not be the case for your jurisdiction, but in many jurisdictions government bodies are required by various laws to make motions to not grant/deny permits of various sorts.

Yes, and even if this is not the case, the committee can still make a motion to recommend that a motion be defeated.

Under the rules in RONR, the proper wording at a meeting of the council would be for a member to move to adopt the ordinance. (If no one wanted to adopt the ordinance, no one needs to do anything.) The committee, however, could adopt a motion to recommend that the ordinance be defeated.

I also agree, however, that government bodies often have weird rules where there is meaning in a motion to deny something.

Edited December 18, 2019 at 02:48 PM by Josh Martin

[Rob Elsman]

2. While the Committee of the Whole may recommend that the motion to ban squirrels be rejected, the form of the motion in the assembly should be to adopt the motion, the recommendation of the Committee of the Whole to the contrary notwithstanding. In this case, members who oppose the proposed ordinance will vote in the negative. RONR (11th ed.), pp. 516, 517.

[Richard Brown]

23 hours ago, Emily T said:

A proposed ordinance banning squirrels in the City is on for discussion at a City standing committee.  None of the committee members likes the idea so someone makes a motion to recommend Council deny the ordinance.  Is this proper?

Yes, this is correct, as I believe all (or most) of my colleagues have stated.

11 hours ago, Joshua Katz said:

It may or may not be the case for your jurisdiction, but in many jurisdictions government bodies are required by various laws to make motions to not grant/deny permits of various sorts.

I agree.  Whether by rule of law or by virtue of a special rule of order or by custom, many governmental bodies such as city councils utilize a procedure where certain ordinances or resolutions, such as requests for zoning variances, etc, are put to a vote before the body as a motion to DENY the request, rather than as a motion to GRANT the request.  This is often because of other provisions in law, such as the right to appeal certain denials to court.  If a motion for an alcoholic beverage permit or a zoning variance is voted down rather than affirmatively denied, it leaves the application in a sort of legal limbo where it has been neither granted nor denied. So, although not ordinarily proper per RONR, it is rather common in city councils for the council to be considering a motion to DENY something rather than a motion to APPROVE it.  The effect of the failure of a motion to approve might or might not be the same as affirmatively adopting a motion to deny.   In the sense that the applicant was not given permission to do what he asked permission to do the effect may be the same, but for procedural appeal rights and for other purposes the effect is not the same.  All of that is beyond the scope of RONR but is still a reality of real world procedures in city councils, zoning boards, etc.

As Mr. Martin stated in his response immediately above, " government bodies often have weird rules where there is meaning in a motion to deny something".  I agree for the reasons I stated above.  We may not fully understand it, but it exists.

51 minutes ago, Rob Elsman said:

While the Committee of the Whole may recommend that the motion to ban squirrels be rejected, the form of the motion in the assembly should be to adopt the motion, the recommendation of the Committee of the Whole to the contrary notwithstanding. In this case, members who oppose the proposed ordinance will vote in the negative. RONR (11th ed.), pp. 516, 517.

For the reasons stated above, I disagree with this.  The form of the motion in the assembly (the city council) may indeed be to deny something. As Mr. Katz, Mr. Martin and I have all stated, in governmental bodies the effect of not approving an application or motion may not be the same as simply rejecting a motion to approve something.  A motion to deny or to disapprove something may not normally be appropriate under RONR, but that doesn't mean that it is always inappropriate.  It is a rather common procedure in many governmental and regulatory bodies.

[Rob Elsman]

As always, Mr. Brown, I reply with the assumption that the rules in RONR control, without any attempt to offer legal advice as if I were an attorney—which I am not.