GREENFIELD — In a six-to-five vote, the City Council tabled the mayor’s veto of the safe city ordinance in its meeting Wednesday.
The veto must be taken up by Oct. 1 because ballot questions for the Nov. 5 election must be submitted in their final language, or removed, 35 days before an election, according to City Clerk Kathy Scott.
Additionally, attorney Gordon Quinn said that, according to Section 3-7 of the city charter, the veto must be addressed by the council “no sooner than 10 days or 30 days after it was received by the council.”
With a special City Council meeting tentatively scheduled for Oct. 1, the council will vote to either uphold the mayor’s veto (meaning the ordinance would cease to exist) or overturn it (which would keep the question on the ballot).
Councilors Verne Sund, Wanda Pyfrom, Brickett Allis and Issac Mass voted against tabling the matter on Wednesday night. Councilors Mark Berson, Timothy Dolan, Sheila Gilmour, Otis Wheeler, Douglas Mayo and Norman Hirschfeld voted in favor of the tabling the matter. City Council President Karen “Rudy” Renaud and Councilor At-Large Ashli Stempel were not present for the meeting.
The safe city ordinance would prohibit city officials from asking about a person’s immigration status, targeting someone or discriminating against an institution providing refuge to immigrants and their families, and taking law enforcement action against someone on the basis of perceived immigration status.
While City Council originally approved the safe city ordinance on July 17, the affirmative vote was temporarily suspended when Precinct 1 City Councilor Verne Sund submitted a motion to reconsider. Following that motion came a citizen’s referendum submitted to the clerk’s office on Aug. 12 seeking to overturn the vote.
The council then affirmed its vote in favor of the safe city ordinance again, creating an August vote, which is the subject of the mayor’s veto. At its August meeting, the council also accepted the citizen’s referendum petition to put the July vote on the ballot. A “yes” vote would uphold the council’s vote and allow the ordinance to go into effect. A “no” vote would rescind the vote.
Martin said in August that he vetoed the safe city ordinance because an executive order directing the Police Department not to ask for immigration status as well as other requests has been in place since 2017, making the ordinance redundant.
To override the veto on Wednesday, the City Council needed a two-thirds vote or the approval of nine councilors; otherwise, the veto would be upheld. Quinn said that if the council voted to overturn the veto with a two-thirds vote, the citizen’s initiative ballot would be valid and the safe city ordinance would be a binding ballot question in the November election.
Martin said the city of Greenfield is already a safe, welcoming place.
“We welcome the legal process and encourage others to engage in that process to become American citizens,” Martin wrote in his veto. “I suggest that the city provide and fund an access point for this path to citizenship by partnering with the Center for New Americans, or other like entities, to facilitate new immigrants in the area. In addition, for those who would like to see changes to the legal process, I encourage them to engage with our federal legislative delegation. Let us move to a middle ground to practice compassion and refrain from divisive dialogue.”
Reach Melina Bourdeau at 413-772-0261, ext. 263 or mbourdeau@recorder.com.