Laserfiche WebLink
1. Voting equipment <br /> <br />ttome rule charter cities should retain the <br />option of setting their own election date. <br /> <br />A municipal primary election should be <br />optional as it is presently. <br /> <br />All direct costs of state-mandated changes <br />and additions to present city election <br />duties should be paid by the state. <br /> <br />PUBLIC HEALTH <br /> <br />Fire personnel standards <br /> <br /> Fire s~Jp,?ression has tradJ~ior~ally.been a unique- <br />ly local function in Minnesota. Not only are fire- <br />fighting problems vastly different from one com- <br />munity to another, but well over ninety percent <br />of Minnesota communities rely primarily on volun- <br />teer firefighters for fire suppression. Because local <br />governing bodies are best equipped to determine <br />the nature of local fire risks, the level of local fire <br />prevention efforts and the practical availability <br />of firefighting personnel, and because power to <br />conduct training on a multi-municipal basis, <br />under the joint powers act, exists and is being used, <br />the League believes that the following principles <br />should govern any state or federal efforts to im- <br />prove firefighting capabilities. <br /> <br />No governmentally established mandatory <br />or suggested physical, physiological, educa- <br />tional, or compensation standards for re- ' <br />cruitment or continued employment for <br />firefighters should be created except at the <br />level of the entity actually employing fire- <br />fighting personnel. <br /> <br />If any state or federal attempts are made <br />to upgrade the quality, skills and ability <br />of firefighting personnel in Minnesota, they <br />should be effectuated by increased finan- <br />cial assistance to provide improved pro- <br />grams, or by direct employment of special- <br />ized personnel at the state or federal level <br />with such personnel made available to as- <br />sist local units of government. <br /> <br />Issues in law enforcement personnel <br /> <br /> The state government has been involved in <br />police training for a number of years during which <br />a strategy has emerged directed at homogenizing <br />law enforcement in the state without regard to <br />the markedly different circumstances and social <br /> <br /> The League supports present law which allows <br />a city the option of selecting which state-appro- <br />ved equipment it determines will best suit its <br />needs, based on local factors, and opposes any <br />state-mandated system of voting equipment. <br />The League also supports amending state law to <br />allow use of punched cards for absentee ballots. <br /> <br />AND SAFETY <br /> <br />environments which exist in Minnesota. At the <br />1978 legislative session this trend culminated in <br />a uniform state, licensing requqrernent which was <br />unprecedented within the United States, which <br />mandated minimum standards for recruitment, <br />training and conduct, and which significantly <br />impinged on the prerogatives of local government. <br />Some steps were taken at the 1979 session to ame- <br />liorate the impact of state licensing by permitting <br />employment of a lesser trained class of police <br />employees in certain cities. Even with the 1979 <br />improvements, however, all cities face substantial <br />increased costs for recruitment of law enforce- <br />ment personnel from a substantially diminished <br />pool of potential applicants, and many small cities <br />are faced with total absence of any continuous law <br />enforcement presence. <br /> <br /> A major effort should be made by cities, the <br />legislature and other concerned parties to develop <br />a rational response to a complex situtation, with <br />the League initiating action wherever appropriate. <br />In developing legislation, the following guidelines <br />are recommended: <br /> <br />Since cities increasingly employ specialized <br />law enforcement personnel, including part- <br />time officers, reserv]sts and paraprofes- <br />sionals, they should clearly have the auth- <br />ority to establish their own standards for <br />such personnel who are not authorized <br />to carry firearms except' in emergencies. <br /> <br />There should be consideration of the fin- <br />ancial impact of any state rules and regula- <br />tions on the cost of law enforcement to <br />cities. For example, uniform minimum <br />recruitment standards may lead to mini- <br />mum wages. Mandatory citizen complaint <br />processing procedures on police officer <br />conduct and behavior may dictate extra <br />cost to produce manuals and train per- <br />sonnel in their use. The state should subsi- <br />dize any such extra costs. <br /> <br />-17- <br /> <br /> <br />