Cities, towns and other governments have long entered into sister-city agreements meant to foster economic and cultural exchanges. But Indiana lawmakers this year slipped a new prohibition blocking locals from joining cooperative agreements with communities in six “foreign adversary” countries into a bill that originally dealt with property taxes.
Proponents maintain the ban is meant to be retroactive, but not everyone thinks it would invalidate the 20-plus existing agreements involving Hoosier municipalities. And it doesn’t affect Indiana’s own sister-state agreement with Chinese province Zhejiang.
The proposal was finalized and signed into law just over a month after the Washington Post detailed China’s renewed focus on diplomacy with local U.S. leaders — featuring a trip former Carmel Mayor Jim Brainard took to China. During that tour, Brainard ratified a sister-city agreement with Xiangyang.
Security-conscious lawmakers applauded the ban. It occupies a scant 11 lines in the 112-page House Enrolled Act 1120, which now tackles state and local administration.
“The (Chinese Communist Party) pushes sister city agreements to get a foothold here, not to help Indiana,” U.S. Rep. Jim Banks of Indiana said in a statement to the Capital Chronicle. “I’m glad that state lawmakers are focused on ridding Communist Party influence from our state, whether that means banning (agricultural) land purchases or cooperative agreements with our foremost adversary.”
State lawmakers concurred.
“I know (the agreements) are usually billed as ways to exchange culture and goodwill. And while that may be true for the majority of them, I think that sister-city agreements with countries listed as foreign adversaries deserve a little more scrutiny,” said Rep. Mitch Gore, D-Indianapolis.
“It’s a method by which these countries can exert some soft power and try to influence American policymakers,” Gore added. He first proposed the provision.
Representatives of local units of government pushed back against state interference.
“We have concerns when any kind of preemption prevails at the statehouse. Sister City relationships are often entered into for hyperlocal reasons,” said Jenna Bentley, the government affairs director at Accelerate Indiana Municipalities.
She listed culture, industry, geographic similarities and economic development as examples.
Lawmakers take notice
Hoosier lawmakers — at the U.S. Capitol building and at home — jumped to end the agreements after the Washington Post story.
That day, Banks asked Carmel to withdraw from its agreement and to refuse trips, like the one Brainard made, that are organized by groups linked to China’s ruling party.
Recently elected Mayor Sue Finkham said her administration was reviewing all agreements and contracts into which Brainard entered “as part of our transition.” But she said there were no visits to China planned. She later pulled Carmel out of the U.S. Heartland China Association, the trip organizer.
Brainard, however, called Banks’ response “immature and impractical, in comments to Current in Carmel. He emphasized the need for “dialogue” between the world’s largest economies.
The day after, Gore offered an amendment on the House floor banning the agreements. The chamber’s Republican supermajority found it not germane to the bill at hand, but committed to finding another proposal to house the language.
Gore said he didn’t expect anything out of that promise. But following that exchange, Rep. Ben Smaltz, R-Auburn, offered an amendment to add it to another piece of legislation in late February. It was moved to House Enrolled Act 1120 near the session’s close.
Law’s impact unclear
There are differing interpretations of what it’ll do, however.
The language states that a local unit — a county, city, town or township — can’t “enter into” any kind of cooperative agreement with a “prohibited person.” It doesn’t specifically ban units from maintaining or continuing such agreements.
The “prohibited person” label includes local governments and educational institutions in six countries the U.S. Secretary of Commerce has designated “foreign adversaries”: China, Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Russia and Venezuela.
And it takes effect July 1, 2024, like most Hoosier laws. But the ban is not explicitly retroactive, leaving unclear whether it would sever existing agreements on that day or simply block new ones.
Gore said the language was supposed to do both.
“I think when it was drafted, the intent was for it to be retroactive, but if the language wasn’t clear enough, that’s a mistake,” he said.
Hoosier municipalities hold 19 sister-city agreements with Chinese counterparts, two with Russian cities and one with a Cuban city, according to a list maintained by the Indiana chapter of Sister Cities International. Some are marked “dormant.”
Bentley, of Accelerate Indiana Municipalities, wrote that she believed the new law “will not impact” existing partnerships.
Gore said he was awaiting “legal clarification.”
But one thing’s for sure — the change doesn’t affect Indiana’s partnership with Zhejiang.
Indiana has maintained that agreement since 1987, according to an Indiana Economic Development Corp. document from the Gov. Mike Pence era. The agreement was signed under former Gov. Robert Orr’s administration.
Gore noted that he filed the initial amendment within 24 hours of learning about Brainard’s activities and said he wasn’t aware of the state’s agreement at the time.
“I would like to see the state cancel the agreement on its own,” he said. “And, you know, I’d be fine re-addressing it in the next session.”
By Leslie Bonilla Muñiz – The Indiana Capital Chronicle is an independent, not-for-profit news organization that covers state government, policy and elections.
