Limitations on subjects for committees?

[laser158689]

We had an electronic voting snafu at our last town legislature meeting.  One of the committees took up the issues and wants to make some motions to the full body to correct them along with a motion to rescind a motion which passed by a very narrow vote made questionable by the procedures used at the meeting.

Given that this committee has a narrow scope in the body's rules (bylaws), would their motions be in order?

Here is the description...

Function. The Labor Contracts Committee shall examine and analyze each proposed labor contract which has been imposed by arbitration or tentatively approved by the Town or the Board of Education of the Town and a labor union. For those contracts negotiated by the First Selectman, its scope of review shall be limited by the Municipal Employee Relations Act. It shall advise the assembly as to the desirability of ratifying all labor contracts.

 

Does a committee have the inherent right to address assembly-specific issues?

If there is another committee which does have authority in the relevant area, but does not take up the issues, does that change anything?

If the Labor Contracts Committee motion is ruled out of order at the meeting, but is properly noticed, can someone else simply make the same motion, and if seconded, have it taken up?

Edited February 16, 2023 at 03:04 PM by laser158689
combine posts. Not getting any responses!

[laser158689]

Does a committee have the inherent right to address assembly-specific issues?

If there is another committee which does have authority in the relevant area, but does not take up the issues, does that change anything?

If the Labor Contracts Committee motion is ruled out of order at the meeting, but is properly noticed, can someone else simply make the same motion, and if seconded, have it taken up?

 

Edited February 16, 2023 at 03:04 PM by laser158689
I'd like to delete this post!

[laser158689]

bump

[Rob Elsman]

Since this is a public legislative assembly, it is likely that there are special rules of order that will supersede what RONR (12th ed.) has to say.  You will want to check the body's own rules.

For your own edification, you may want to study RONR (12th ed.) §§13, 50, and 51.

[laser158689]

Nothing in the body's rules is clearly persuasive on this, hence the question(s).

[Josh Martin]

On 2/15/2023 at 12:45 PM, laser158689 said:

Given that this committee has a narrow scope in the body's rules (bylaws), would their motions be in order?

Given that no information has been provided concerning the subject matter of the motions, I’m not sure how I am expected to answer this question.

Speaking generally, motions may be made on behalf of the committee if they are within the scope of the committee’s charge.

If they are not within the scope of the committee’s charge, an individual member could make the motions.

On 2/15/2023 at 12:45 PM, laser158689 said:

Does a committee have the inherent right to address assembly-specific issues?

I’m not entirely certain what is meant by “assembly-specific issues,” but I am inclined to think the answer is “no.” Committees are limited to the duties assigned by the assembly and its rules and do not have “inherent authority.”

On 2/15/2023 at 12:45 PM, laser158689 said:

If there is another committee which does have authority in the relevant area, but does not take up the issues, does that change anything?

Not really.

On 2/15/2023 at 12:45 PM, laser158689 said:

If the Labor Contracts Committee motion is ruled out of order at the meeting, but is properly noticed, can someone else simply make the same motion, and if seconded, have it taken up?

I understand this question to be asking “If a motion is made on behalf of a committee, and the motion is ruled out of order on the grounds that the motion exceeds the scope of the committee’s charge, may the same motion be made by an individual member, assuming the motion is otherwise in order?”

With that understanding, I would say the answer is “yes.” It may be, however, that the member will have to wait until later in the order of business to do so.

[laser158689]

@Josh Martin You are correct on all assumptions and I greatly appreciate the reply!!