CC_Minutes_2014_1110 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday,November 10, 2014 Page 27 $100 for wetland/shoreline was about. Councilmember McGehee referenced the discrepancies and inconsistencies for lifetime dog licenses (page 2) depending on whether or not they were sterilized and/or micro-chipped. Councilmember McGehee noted a number of fees within the Administration category that she found curious or needing further clarification. City Manager Trudgeon offered to have staff further review and define those are- as under questions. Mr. Trudgeon did note that many of the items on page 6 were City charges for administrative fines above state statute. City Attorney Gaughan concurred with City Manager Trudgeon, further clarifying that often the City may choose to issue an Administrative Citation versus enforc- ing State Statute depending on the particular situation. Mr. Gaughan noted that the allocation of fines depending on who issued the citation and how it was done, with the State retaining all or a larger portion of fines depending on the type and situation. Mr. Gaughan provided some examples between administrative penal- ties versus those set by the State legislature. Mr. Gaughan did clarify that a mu- nicipal violations and notice provisions based on State Statute, assuring the City Council that a potential violator would not pay more, but how a fine was ad- dressed would define how it was divided between the municipality and state, and often depending on the type of violation, with each fine having a different set di- vision and identifying how much could be retained by a local municipality and how much went to the State's General Fund. Based on his years of prosecutorial experience, Mr. Gaughan assured Councilmembers that the financial basis was not part of the consideration when issuing a citation. Mr. Gaughan noted that, of- ten with an administrative fee, it would not go on a violator's record, since it was handled in-house versus through the court system. Councilmember Laliberte expressed some concern, providing several examples (e.g. Wabasha County) of jurisdictions that got into trouble by charging municipal fees versus legislative fees; and asked that staff and the City Attorney look into that allocation more carefully. City Attorney Gaughan noted that this was why he stated it depended on the type of fine; and suggested some of those items may still be on the books or included in the fee schedule,but no longer applicable and no longer used. Councilmember McGehee expressed confusion about several other fees, with Mayor Roe suggesting she review them with staff off-line, in addition to request- ing staffs review of residential variances and other fees within the Community Development Department as previously noted. Finance Director Miller advised that staff would further review the fee schedule before bringing it back for action, and ensure staff representatives were available at that time to address any additional questions or areas of confusion.