Scribd
Upload
12K views2 pages

Jacksonville Mayor Vetoes Immigration-Related Bill

Mayor Donna Deegan vetoed Ordinance 2025-138 due to its duplicative nature with existing laws, lack of defined scope, and potential legal exposure for the City and its partners. The bill fails to provide concrete examples or fiscal estimates, introducing unclear reporting requirements without budget support. The Mayor emphasized the City's commitment to compliance with federal and state laws while ensuring accountability and transparency in its operations.

Uploaded by

ActionNewsJax
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
12K views2 pages

Jacksonville Mayor Vetoes Immigration-Related Bill

Mayor Donna Deegan vetoed Ordinance 2025-138 due to its duplicative nature with existing laws, lack of defined scope, and potential legal exposure for the City and its partners. The bill fails to provide concrete examples or fiscal estimates, introducing unclear reporting requirements without budget support. The Mayor emphasized the City's commitment to compliance with federal and state laws while ensuring accountability and transparency in its operations.

Uploaded by

ActionNewsJax
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR DONNA DEEGAN CITY HALL SUITE 400 MAYOR, 117 W. DUVAL STREET JACKSONVILLE, FL 32202 To: The Honorable Randy White, President Jacksonville City Council FROM: Mayor Donna Deegan DATE: June24, 2025 SUBJECT: — Ordinance 2025-138-E President White: This memo serves as my veto of 2025-138, |. The bill is éuplicative of existing state and federal laws and requirements. Immigration is the domain of the federal government, nt local agencies Florida Statute §908.103, enacted in 2019, prohibits the establishment of sanctuary policies by local governments which Thave repeatedly stated my commitment to follow. Tn addition, existing compliance requirements already include protocols related to eligibility and egal status for programs and funding. 2. ‘The bill lacks a defined scope and fails to quantify the problem it seeks to address. During debate on the bill there was lack of concrete examples or fiscal estimates. The bill introduces reporting requirements without budget or staffing for implementation. This leaves administrative departments with a policy that is unclear as to how to comply. 3. The bill introduces legal exposure for the City and for non-profit and healtheare partners. Requiring the City’s contracted partners to distinguish service recipients based on immigration status raises significant operational and legal questions. Attempting to identify, document or separate recipients based on citizenship status may also havea chlling effect, discouraging residents from accessing public safety or healthcare services. This creates downstream risks — including unreportel crime, public health concerns, and increased emergency care uilization— ultimately generating greater costs for taxpayers, not less. Furthermore, exempting cetan providers from the porting requirements creates a discriminatory environment. 4. ‘The City isalready taking steps to ensure accountability and compliance. ‘Again, let me be clear: [will always comply with current federal and state law. I believe it ‘accountability. I believe in transparency. And I believe in meaningful ation. | will be directing departments to review and strengthen procedure related to contractor ‘documentation and reporting, especially for sub-contractors. ! am also calling fora report for al city dollars provided to non-profits starting from FY 24-25. City departments will continue to ‘comply with all applicable immigration laws. In conclusion, Ordinance 2025-138 introduces unnecessary administrative burdens, lacks Fiscal justification, and was passed in a context of misinformation that does not serve the City's best interests, We are called on to be principled and to lead with truth. Therefore, I veto Ordinance 2025-138 Sincerely, Donna Deegan Mayor Ce: Jacksonville City Council Legislative Services Office of General Counsel

You might also like