Laserfiche WebLink
July 31, 2008 <br />Page 7 <br />As the Legislature continues to debate the issue, it is likely safe for cities to proceed <br />with administrative penalties for non -traffic -related violations. <br />2. Enforcement issues_ <br />Assuming a city has full authority to establish an administrative process for cede <br />enforcement in given situations, the question remains whether such a process will be effective. <br />This is an open question, with little, if any, guidance in the law. <br />Obviously, criminal enforcement in district court is an option, but, as noted above, is <br />not perfect. However, It is far from dear whether an administrative process is more effective. <br />Except for the two statutes cited above, where administrative penalties are specifically <br />proscribed, cities are generally free to establish their own process. For example, there could be <br />progressive fines (first offense, $300: second offense, $500; third offense $1000, and so on); <br />or there could be progressive fines to a certain point, eventually leading to a criminal citation. <br />Some cities provide that an unpaid administrative penalty results in a misdemeanor citation. <br />There is no conclusive evidence that these procedures are more effective inaccomplishing code <br />compliance. <br />There is also the issue of collection of an administrative penalty. Cities approach this <br />differently. Some do take the approach that an unpaid administrative fine becomes a lien <br />against the property and may be assessed against the property and collected in the same <br />manner as taxes. A statutory city does not have clear authority to follow this procedure. While <br />it is true that a city has authority to intervene to abate a public nuisance pursuant to Minnesota <br />Statutes § 429.021, subd. 10, and specially assess the cost, the assessment authority is for <br />the cost of abatement, not for an administrative penalty for a code violation. Accordingly, <br />authority to assess an unpaid administrative penalty is not express in every situation. <br />For example, a city does have the authority to certify "unpaid [water and sewer] charges <br />to the county auditor with taxes against the property seared for collection as other takes are <br />collected," Minn.Stat. § 444.075, surd. 3e. This authority does not extend to unpaid <br />municipal gas or electric charges. See A.G. op. 624-D--5 (July 0, 1953). Likewise, there is <br />no explicit authority granted to statutory cities to certify any amount they choose for collection <br />with property taxes. <br />