| Newton MA News and Politics BlogGuest post by Andrea Kelley, City Councilor At-Large from Ward 3

This past year, thanks to Zoom meetings, more people have been attending City Council and committee meetings.  For many of these new-to-the-council-meeting folks, they often ask questions about what ‘outside the rail” means and abstaining on votes.  Here’s my take on both of those, based on a recent Full Council meeting where a Resolution to thank the Fair Housing Committee for its work during National Fair Housing Month, furthering the federal and local fair housing goals, took an interesting turn …

 

Are there guidelines for City Councilors abstaining from a vote, or standing “outside the rail” to not be counted as voting in favor or opposed to an item? I think not.
 
In-depth deliberations leading to a vote by the full Newton City Council happen at the committee level.  With a smaller group of eight members, one from each ward, the committee delves into a docket item to review and vote, which then leads to a vote by the full Council of 24 members. In committee, members vote Yay, Nay or Abstain.
 
In my experience as a Councilor, a committee member chooses to abstain from a vote when:
 
              * They don’t feel they have enough information to form a clear yay or nay opinion. This may be due to materials not being provided in a full or timely way by the petitioner, or they have not been able to review or process the information yet, or
 
            * They have all the information but that doesn’t lead them to a clear Yay or Nay, and/or
 
            * The appearance of a conflict of interest where their vote could imply partiality. (In the case of a real conflict of interest, such as the applicant is a client, an employee, an employer, a friend or relative, the Councilor will have filed a Conflict of Interest Disclosure form and be recused, vs. abstain.)
 
Abstaining at a full City Council meeting is not an option.  It is expected that each Councilor will cast a vote in favor or in opposition to every docket item and proposed Resolution,  and if voting Nay, explain why. This contributes to the discussion, informs other Councilors and constituents of issues they may not have considered, and helps deter future litigation.  Some choose to stand  “outside the rail”, meaning they do not cast a vote at all and are essentially absent from the vote.
 
The reasons to stand “outside the rail” seem similar to me to those for abstaining; inadequate information, not having a strong opinion one way or the other, an appearance of a conflict of interest, being physically elsewhere. Sometimes the Councilor has left the room to be at another meeting, for a bathroom or snack break, or to talk to a constituent or staff member. There is no official guidance or criteria that I’m aware of for abstaining or choosing to be “outside the rail”.
 
Abstentions and absenting oneself from the vote by “standing outside the rail” are also used by Councilors to avoid making their positions known, trying not to alienate some constituents by disagreeing with stance.  This is a way to not be accountable to the public, as they have not gone on the record with a yay or nay vote, nor necessarily had to substantiate their indecision or opposition.
 
So, try to figure out on any specific item, is the Councilor’s abstention or standing “outside the rail” reflective of a legitimate lack of clarity on a position, or avoidance of transparency to be on the record with an opinion?