Minutes - Council Work Session - 07/17/2007

Home

Councilmember Dehen stated he spoke with the Stoney Hilgus, the Coon Rapids Prosecutor, who used to be the Cambridge City Administrator. Mr. Hilgus advised him that the Police Chief had come to the city with this and liked the idea because it gives the officers an option. Their fines involve speed violations and less serious code enforcement violations; they do a $50 administrative fine, and then up to $100. Mr. Hilgus talked about the State Auditor's Office threatening that cities would not get a clean audit if they use the administrative penalties, and it is an ongoing battle. The City of Cambridge has been administering these fees, and in the past two years has put away $60,000 to $70,000. Mr. Hilgus said that legally no one has ever challenged it; as far as he was concerned it was a great process and the cops loved it. With this program the people do not have to go to court; they can pay the fine and it will not go on their driving record, and the officers are still able to track the tickets. Mr. Hilgus' position was that the City does all the work and they should be able to keep the proceeds. Councilmember Dehen stated the State is cutting everyone's LGA, but continues to want to make the surcharges. On a $45 speeding ticket there is a $78 surcharge that goes to the State, and the City will realize $15 to $25 of the $45 ticket. He stated he thinks this is a great idea. If there is a question of the illegality it will be brought back next year. It seems to him if there is some question they could hold those proceeds for at least one year to determine whether it is valid. This would be a great way to pay for the police supplies that are needed. Councilmember Dehen stated he has seen Attorney General opinions before, and they are not the force and effect of law; they are just an opinion. It seems it is a lever they are using to keep the City from getting those proceeds. Councilmember Strommen stated putting aside the Attorney General and State Auditor opinions and going to the policy issue, her opinion is that it is bad policy to tie traffic violations to revenue projection. The residents will have a perception that the City is out with speed traps to bump up revenue for the Police Department. She has talked with a couple of residents who have been in communities where they have this type of program, and that is the perception they have had. She also shares some of the concerns of the State Auditor report. She would be concerned with violations not going through the State and staying off of individuals' driving records. Councilmember Dehen stated either way the individual is paying for the ticket. Councilmember Strommen stated this would be a revenue generator for the City; otherwise there would be no reason to do it. It is clear that this is under the State's authority, and it is not clear about the authority of the municipalities. She does not see the benefit for the City other than as a revenue generator. Councilmember Dehen stated as a Council they are trying to find innovative ways to keep the funds in their City, as opposed to letting them go to the State, which does not give them any benefit. He stated they are not getting LGA and questioned why they would not be proactive and hold some of this revenue. The City would be just keeping the revenue, rather than having it go to some other project. He stated this is a great way to be proactive and the City is missing the boat if they do not do it. Mayor Pro Tern Elvig commented he remembers going through small towns when he was younger and the officers trying to make their quota of tickets at the end of the month. That being City Council Work Session / July 17,2007 Page 3 of 12