1A, Community Livability - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

July 31, 2008 Page 7 As the Legislature continues to debate the issue, it is ffkely safe for cities to proceed with administrative penalties for non-traffic-refated violations. 2. Enforcement issues. Assuming a city has full authority to establish an administrative process for code enforcement in given situations. the question remains whether such a process witl be effective. This is an open question, with littleJ if any, guidance in the Jaw.. Obviously, criminal enforcement in district court is an option, but, as noted above, is not perfect_ However, it is far from clear whether an administrative process is more effective. Except for the two statutes cited above, where administrative penalties are specificafly proscribed, cities are generally free to establish their own process.. For example, there could be progressive fines (first offense} $300; second offense. $500; third offense $1000, and so on); or there could be progressive fines to a certain pointt eventually leading to a criminal citation. Some cities provide that an unpaid administrative penalty results in a misdemeanor citation. There is no conclusive evidence that these procedures are more effective in accomplishing code compliance. There is also the issue of collection of an adminrstrative penalty. Cities approach this differently. Some do take the approach that an unpaid administrative fine becomes a lien against the property and may be assessed against the property and caffected in the same manner as taxes. A statutory city does not have clear authority to follow this procedure. While it is true that a city has authority to intervene to abate a pubHc nuisance pursuant to Minnesota Statutes ~ 429.021, subd. 1 (8) 1 and specially assess the cost,. the assessment authority is for the cost of abatementt not for an administrative penalty for a code violation. AccordinglYJ authority to assess an unpaid administrative penalty is not express in every situation. For example, a city does have the authority to certify "unpaid [water and sewer] charges to the county auditor with taxes against the property served for coHection as other taxes are collected:' Minn.Stat. ~ 444.075, subd. 3e. This authority does not extend to unpaid municipal gas or efectric charges. See A.G. Op. 624-D-5 (July 6, 1953). Likewise, there is no explicit authority granted to statutory cities to certify any amount they choose for collection with property taxes..