House approves measure setting stepwise outreach before citations for camping on public land

Representative Ireland, sponsor of Senate Bill 197, said the bill aims to connect people experiencing homelessness with services rather than criminalize them. "This bill is not about punishing people for being homeless. We are never going to arrest or jail our way out of this problem," he said, and described a multi-step process officers must follow before citations can be issued.

The measure requires an officer who finds someone camping or sleeping on public land to first assess whether the person qualifies for an emergency mental-health detention. If not, the officer must provide a warning and offer transport to a nearby facility within five miles that provides temporary respite and housing services. The sponsor emphasized that "no one can be cited unless such a facility exists in the first place and is available to receive them and they have to refuse that offer." If a facility is unavailable or refuses, the bill directs officers to contact a local crisis intervention team where one exists; only after these steps and after waiting 24 to 72 hours depending on location would a citation be possible.

Supporters said the bill also directs the state to pursue a Medicaid waiver to expand long‑term housing and community‑based support services under the Healthy Indiana Plan for people with mental‑health or addiction challenges. Representative Ireland told colleagues the measure is intended "to ensure fairness before fines, offers help before punishment, and restores dignity through due process." He described additional referral options such as problem‑solving courts for people with criminal elements and behavioral-health needs.

Opponents said the bill would criminalize homelessness and risk jailing people who cannot pay fines. Representative Campbell said groups that work with veterans and people experiencing homelessness oppose the language added in committee and warned that "this bill will put an individual in jail for 60 days. A $500 fine that they cannot pay. And when they are released from jail, they will remain homeless." Several members and outside groups, including veterans' service organizations cited by speakers, urged more time to vet the changes and to invest in shelter and services rather than enforcement.

Several representatives pressed the sponsor about stakeholder outreach, local implementation, and fiscal impacts. Representative Andrade asked whether law‑enforcement groups or sheriff associations had given formal testimony on the specific language; the sponsor said there had been conversations with stakeholders but acknowledged that the homelessness language did not receive public testimony in the committee where it was added. Members also asked about fiscal implications; the sponsor said the bill itself carried no direct state fiscal estimate for the enforcement steps, while Medicaid‑waiver work would be separate.

Debate included repeated calls to prioritize more emergency shelter capacity, transitional and supportive housing, and local service investments before or alongside any enforcement pathway. Some representatives urged a summer study to bring stakeholders together and to resolve implementation details; the sponsor said the bill was intended to function only where services exist and that those service prerequisites are built into the statute.

The House moved the bill forward; the transcript records final passage on the floor. The bill will proceed to the next step in the legislative process. The transcript records lengthy debate and multiple requests for clarifying implementation steps and fiscal impacts.

Ending note: Proponents and critics agreed on the urgency of addressing unhoused populations but disagreed sharply on means. Lawmakers who argued for more time stressed local service capacity and stakeholder vetting; backers said the bill balances outreach with enforcement to compel connection to services when available.