HomeMy WebLinkAboutVeto Letter for Bill No 20-22CITY OF SOUTH BEND
MAYOR JAMES MUELLER
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
July 16, 2020
Dear Councilmembers,
Filed in Clerk's Office
JUL 18 20?a
AWI iM J NES
CITY CLERK, SOUTH W40, IN
As you know, there remain questions about the passage of Bill 20-22. With no mention of a vote
by acclamation in the municipal code, Robert's Rule of Orderl provides that a vote by
acclamation is a form of unanimous consent. The motion to pass Bill 20-22 by acclamation failed
because there was opposition to the motion. No subsequent motion on Bill 20-22 was made prior
to the 5-4 roll call vote in favor of the resolution.
Whether or not the Common Council passed this resolution in full accordance with proper
procedure, I am returning this bill unsigned. In the Statement of Administration's Position that
was filed with the Clerk and shared with Council prior to the vote, several critical issues were
raised. Chief among them were the calls in the resolution to exceed my legal authority as Mayor,
in addition to inappropriate encroachments on our respective roles. Approving the language in
this resolution forces a choice between supporting an overreach of legal authorities or ignoring
the text contained within the resolution. Neither choice is acceptable. We must meet a higher
standard for legislation, even non-binding resolutions. I cannot approve legislation based on
intent over the actual text.
While I fully support acting as swiftly as possible and working together as a community
toward sustainable solutions for our homeless neighbors, I am vetoing Bill 20-22 for the
reasons stated above.
Sincerely,
James Mueller
1 Section 2-9 of the South Bend municipal code establishes that "[t]he most recent edition of Robert's Rules of
Order shall be the authority on all questions of parliamentary law and procedure not specifically covered by this
article."
1400 COUNTY -CITY BUILDING • 227 W. JEFFERSON BOULEVARD • SOUTH BEND, INDIANA 46601
PHONE 574/235-9261 • FAx 574/235-9892 • TTY 574/235-5567
APPENDIX A: STATEMENT OF ADMINISTRATION'S POSITION FROM JULY 13, 2020
STATEMENT OF ADMINISTRATION'S POSITION
Bill No. 20-22 — A resolution in support of declaring a state of emergency and establishing an
emergency temporary aid and shelter program
The Administration opposes Bill No. 20-22, which would urge the declaration of a state of
emergency and establishment of an emergency temporary aid and shelter program for those
individuals experiencing chronic homelessness in our community. The Administration continues
to work with community partners to identify both short-term and long-term solutions that include
the potential establishment of a low -barrier emergency shelter outside of weather amnesty
months and making more permanent supportive housing units available for individuals
experiencing homelessness. The Administration is also forming an implementation group with
Council representatives to see how best we can fill the gaps in services for our homeless
neighbors together as a community. This resolution, while legally non-binding, is not
constructive and does not offer a viable path forward.
There is no mention of the legal authority to declare a state of emergency to address this issue. It
is not clear how the authority for the Mayor to declare a local disaster emergency (IC 10-14-3-
29) could be applied to this situation. Even if this were an appropriate application of that
authority, it would not allow for the suspension of laws and regulations called for in the
resolution.
While many of the actions contained in the resolution are worthy of discussion, there is not yet a
clear consensus that these specific measures provide the best path forward. The resolution also
blurs the appropriate separation of roles between the legislative and executive branches. The
resolution not only encroaches upon executive branch roles but also asks the Administration to
overstep its authority to bypass well-defined roles of the Council and other bodies. In general,
the Administration is committed to respect and uphold the Constitution of the United States and
the State of Indiana, as well as federal, state, and local laws. Accordingly, the Administration
will oppose all such encroachments on our respective roles and encourage consultation and
consensus to the maximum extent possible to avoid the need for statements similar to this one in
the future.
If the Mayor were presented with Bill 20-22, his advisors would strongly recommend that he
veto the bill.