Laserfiche WebLink
Response: The League of Minnesota <br />Cities supports the authority of cities to <br />regulate and license pawnbrokers, and <br />opposes any legislation that would remove <br />the authority of local governments to <br />enact more restrictive regulations than <br />currently exist in Minn. Stat. ch. 325J. <br />The League supports the authority of <br />cities to set licensing and transaction fees <br />that enable them to recover their full <br />regulatory and enforcement expenses. <br />The League supports cooperation <br />between law enforcement agencies and <br />the pawn industry that enhances the <br />ability to identify illegal activity and <br />recover stolen property. Access to <br />transaction information by law <br />enforcement agencies is vital to <br />accomplishing this goal. Further, the <br />sharing of information through the use of <br />the APS is a proactive way to prevent <br />property and other crimes. <br />SD-34. City Costs for Enforcing <br />State and Local Laws <br />Issue: Cities experience substantial costs <br />enforcing state and local laws, particularly <br />those related to traffic, controlled <br />substances, and incarceration of prisoners. <br />The current method in our criminal justice <br />system of recovering costs for law <br />enforcement and prosecution through fines <br />is insufficient to meet the costs incurred by <br />local governments. Further, when a violator <br />requests relief from paying the full amount <br />of the fine and surcharge, the courts have <br />been more inclined to waive the fine than to <br />reduce the surcharge. When this occurs, the <br />local units of government recover no costs <br />even though the city has incurred expenses. <br />Response: The Legislature should review <br />this issue and adopt measures that <br />provide for complete reimbursement of <br />the costs incurred by local governments in <br />enforcing state and local laws. Solutions <br />that should be considered include: <br />a) Increasing fine amounts. <br />b) Removing or modifying county and <br />state surcharges that conflict with cost <br />recovery principles. <br />c) Requiring the courts to consider <br />ordering restitution from the <br />defendant to reimburse the costs of <br />enforcement and prosecution as part <br />of any sentence. <br />d) Requiring that if a court reduces the <br />amount paid by a violator, any <br />reduction should be made from the <br />surcharge and not the fine. <br />SD-35. Compensation and <br />Reimbursement for Public Safety <br />Services <br />Issue: Municipal public safety personnel <br />often respond to emergencies involving non- <br />residents. For example, municipal fire, <br />police, and/or ambulance services may be <br />dispatched to the scene of a traffic accident <br />on an interstate highway involving victims <br />from other cities or states. Although cities <br />can bill for some public safety services they <br />provide to non-residents, they have limited <br />authority to collect on unpaid bills. <br />Cities have also found that auto insurance <br />policies vary when it comes to coverage for <br />emergency responses. Insurance companies <br />of those responsible for accidents sometimes <br />deny payment for fire and ambulance <br />service. <br />Additionally, municipal public safety <br />personnel commonly respond to <br />emergencies that require the provision of <br />medical services. The medical services <br />provided by the city -employed first <br />responders are part of a continuum of health <br />care that is covered by insurance companies <br />League of Minnesota Cities <br />2018 City Policies Page 23 <br />