My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Council Work Session - 11/10/2008
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Council Work Session
>
2008
>
Agenda - Council Work Session - 11/10/2008
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/19/2025 9:37:55 AM
Creation date
11/7/2008 12:07:39 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Council Work Session
Document Date
11/10/2008
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
46
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />~i~~g~~~~~~~~7~Ft'=" --......~.-- <br /> <br />wo9 Ua9Ur! fl /(11" <br />e/7ii> ;:6't?Cj /i1"/~ <br />COivINIITTEE RECOJ"fMENDATIOJVS <br /> <br /> <br />1 While emergency responses are legitimate functions of municipal public safety d.epartments, the <br />2 costs of providing services to non-residents should not be bome by the community's taxpayers. <br /> <br />3 <br /> <br />4 Response: Cities should be compensated for emergency responses they provide to non- <br />S residents. They should have the authority to bill for the full cost of fire and ambulance <br />6 services they provide, and to collect on unpaid bills. Finally, minimum auto insurance <br />7 policies should be required to insure for the cost of emergency responses. <br />8 <br />9 SD-26. Administrative Fines (AF) <br /> <br />I <br />~ <br />I <br />I <br />h <br />i <br />~it <br />.~. <br />. ~.~.l <br />~~"..f.;.l\ <br />;;,: <br /> <br />,~. <br />f! <br />~'\ <br /> <br />10 Issue: Cities have'implemented administrative enforcement programs for violations of local <br />11 regulatory ordinances, such as building codes, zoning codes, health codes, and public nuisance <br />12 ordinances. This use of adlninistrative proceedings has kept enforcement at the local level and <br />13 reduced pressure on over-burdened district court systems. <br />14 <br />15 The Legislature has repeatedly increased the fine surcharge on district court cases to generate <br />16 revenues for the state's general fund. The surcharge-the amount paid over and above the fine- <br />17 is now $~fuer Citation. The growth in the surcharge has dramatically increased the cost of <br />18 citations and has caused some to question whether the total of the fine and surcharge is <br />19 disproportionate for minor matters. To lower the amount imposed on their residents, a number of <br />20 cities have expanded their administrative programs to include some offenses traditionally heard <br />21 in district court, such as minor traffic offenses. <br />22 <br />23 The increased state surcharges have not been used to assistlocal units of government with the <br />24 growing costs ofenforcemertt and prosecution. No matter which entity---city, county or state- <br />25 issues a statutory citation, the violator pays between $115 and $127 for a minor speeding <br />26 violation. Of this amount, the city receives between $13 and $20, and the county receives just <br />27 slightly more. <br /> <br />~, <br /> <br />~: <br /> <br />~: <br /> <br />~;~ <br /> <br />28 <br /> <br />-40- <br /> <br />33 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.