The Cambridge City Council adjourned its meeting last night rather than discuss an eleventh-hour resolution on a ballot measure seeking to reintroduce rent control to the city.

Since today is the deadline for the city council to take action on the ballot into its own hands—and with the failure of a recent challenge to the validity of the petition—the rent control ballot initiative will now indefinitely be placed on the ballot for the Nov. 5 citywide election.

If Cambridge voters approve the measure in the polls, the city will file a so-called “home-rule petition” with the state legislature. If the legislature votes affirmatively, the city would be able to re-enact rent control laws within its borders even though the practice was banned in Massachusetts in 1994.

Councillor Brian P. Murphy ’86 said that he is reluctant to support the rent control ballot initiative because it is unlikely to pass in the state legislature.

“I would rather focus on positive things that we can do as a council,” Murphy said.

Last week, opponents of rent control challenged about 1,450 of the 4,500 signatures on the petition to put rent control on the ballot—enough to invalidate the petition.

But the Cambridge Election Commission rejected all but 17 challenges, leaving enough signatures to put the rent control measure on the ballot.

Once the petition was validated, the city council had two options: to send the petition to the state legislature directly or to take no action.

With the clock ticking down towards the deadline for council action, Councillors Anthony D. Galluccio, David P. Maher, Timothy J. Toomey and Mayor Michael A. Sullivan introduced a measure late in last night’s meeting asking the council to oppose the reintroduction of rent control while still placing the matter before voters.

Councillor Marjorie C. Decker moved to adjourn the meeting at that point, and a divided council accepted her motion.

“I think it’s a vote of cowardice and an affront to democracy,” said Toomey, who said he opposes rent control but wants to see the referendum on the ballot. “If they can’t stand up and say where they stand on a tough issue they should not be in this chamber.”

Maher had a similar reaction.

“It shouldn’t make a difference whether you’re for or against rent control. More dialogue is good,” he said. “It was our hope to have some dialogue and have some positions of the councillors heard tonight.”

Its inclusion as an unannounced late measure under unfinished business made the parliamentary procedure surrounding it murky, Decker said.

“This issue is charged and divisive. I didn’t know this measure was going to be discussed until minutes before it came up,” she said. “Civic leaders need to model a discussion based on substance, and not politics as usual three weeks before an election.”