Virtual File - Item

Text:
8334004
STATE OF MINNESOTA
DISTRICT COURT
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT
CASE TYPE: Other Civil
The Ninetieth Minnesota State Senate
and the Ninetieth Minnesota State
House of Representatives,
Plaintiffs,
v.
Mark B. Dayton, in his official capacity
as Governor of the State of Minnesota,
and Myron Frans, in his official capacity
as Commissioner of the Minnesota
Department of Management and Budget,
Defendants.
Court File No. 62-cv-17-3601
Chief Judge John H. Guthmann
DEFENDANTS' ANSWER
TO PLAINTIFFS' COMPLAINT
The Governor has explicit and unqualified authority under the Minnesota Constitution to
line-item veto any item of appropriation: "If a bill presented to the governor contains several
items of appropriation of money, he may veto one or more of the items while approving the bill."
Minn. Const. art. IV, § 23.
The Legislative and Executive branches of Minnesota government have shared
responsibilities for enacting laws. As described in
Brayton v. Pawlenty
, 781 N.W.2d 357, 365
(Minn. 2010):
The Legislature has the primary responsibility to establish the spending priorities
for the state through the enactment of appropriation laws. Minn. Const. art. IV,
§ 22;
id.
art. XI, § 1. The executive branch has a limited, defined role in the
budget process. The Governor may propose legislation, including a budget that
includes appropriation amounts, which proposals the Legislature is free to accept
or reject.
But the only formal budgetary authority granted the Governor by the
constitution is to approve or veto bills passed by the Legislature
.
See
Minn.
Const. art. IV, § 23. With respect to appropriation bills,
the constitution grants
the Governor the more specific line-item veto authority, through which an item of
appropriation can be vetoed without striking the entire bill. Id.
If the Governor
exercises the veto power, the Legislature may reconsider the bill or items vetoed,
and if approved by a two-thirds vote, the vetoed bill or item becomes law.
Id.
Defendants' Answer Page 1 of 30
Filed in Second Judicial District Court
6/22/2017 1:36 PM
Ramsey County, MN
62-CV-17-3601
8334004
2
(Emphasis added).
In the 2017 legislative session, the Minnesota Senate and House attempted to suppress
the constitutional veto authority of the Governor by placing into the Omnibus State Government
Appropriations bill a "poison pill" that would have denied appropriations to the Department of
Revenue if Governor Dayton vetoed the tax bill. Attached as
Exhibit A
is a true and correct
copy of the appropriation for the Revenue Department. Governor Dayton signed the tax bill in
order to enable the Department of Revenue to continue its operations, collecting revenue for the
State and providing services to taxpayers. But, because of concerns with the impact of the tax bill
on the future financial health of the State, and to seek renegotiation of a political solution on
three key policy issues of concern to the Governor that were contained in the tax bill and two
issues contained in other bills, Governor Dayton used his constitutionally-prescribed power to
line-item veto two of three legislative appropriations--that of the Senate and the House. Since
the Legislature chose to adjourn
sine die
just after presenting the bills to the Governor, and
therefore relinquished any opportunity to override the vetoes, the Governor offered to call a
second special session to revisit these five policy issues and the Senate and House
appropriations. The leaders of the Senate and House have thus far declined to consider any
changes to bills that were signed. By bringing this legal action, they seek to avoid further
engagement in the ongoing political process.
The Minnesota Constitution authorizes the Governor's line-item vetoes, without any
qualification as to the Governor's subjective intent or purpose. The Governor's vetoes do not
"unfund" the Legislature. The appropriation for the Legislative Coordinating Commission
("LCC") for over $35 million has become law. Attached as
Exhibit B
is a true and correct copy
of the appropriation to the LCC. Although the vetoes eliminated the separate appropriations for
Defendants' Answer Page 2 of 30
Filed in Second Judicial District Court
6/22/2017 1:36 PM
Ramsey County, MN
62-CV-17-3601
8334004
3
the Senate and House, this did not violate separation of powers because the vetoes did not and
could not eliminate the inherent constitutional right of those bodies to obtain court-ordered
funding for their critical, core functions.
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
Defendants Mark B. Dayton, in his official capacity as Governor of the State of
Minnesota, and Myron Frans, in his official capacity as Commissioner of the Minnesota
Department of Management and Budget ("Defendants") deny each allegation in the Complaint of
The Ninetieth Minnesota State Senate and the Ninetieth Minnesota State House of
Representatives' (together "Plaintiffs") Complaint except as expressly admitted below.
INTRODUCTION
1.
Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 1, except to admit that Plaintiffs
attempt to seek the relief they describe. Defendants specifically deny that Plaintiffs are
constitutionally entitled to whatever appropriations they pass regardless of later vetoes. If
Plaintiffs are unwilling to reach an agreement with the Governor on appropriations, the
Minnesota Constitution does not entitle them to obtain an appropriation, but only to receive, by
court order, the minimum funding strictly necessary to perform the Senate and House's critical,
core functions, if and when that funding ever becomes necessary.
2.
Defendants admit that the Senate and House passed nine appropriation bills and a
tax bill. The Senate and House adjourned the 2017 special session
sine die
and the budget bills
that were passed during the regular and special sessions were presented to Governor Dayton as
provided by Minnesota Constitution, art. IV, § 23.
3.
Defendants admit that Governor Dayton signed all of the appropriation bills and
the tax bill into law. And Governor Dayton exercised his line-item veto authority to veto two of
Defendants' Answer Page 3 of 30
Filed in Second Judicial District Court
6/22/2017 1:36 PM
Ramsey County, MN
62-CV-17-3601