CC_Minutes_2008_0714 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, July 14, 2008 Page 7 ity of and number of check offenses; and served to divert offenders from the court system. Mr. McCullough advised that FCS had been in business for 23 years; and their intent was to work with clients, to obtain payment for the merchant/victim through a payment system; to assist offenders and provide financial and budget training so they can avoid recurrences; and not add criminal charges and compli- cations for offenders who are simply experiencing financial difficulties and use their check book for a loan. Mr. McCullough noted that FCS didn't threaten people; but noted that there are sometimes more aggregate cases of multiple offenders crossing jurisdictional lines, and then worked to package prosecution for obvious professional offenders. Chief Sletner advised that the City's Police Department didn't have the manpower to handle insufficient fund checks; and that merchants usually absorbed the costs for such checks and increased their cost of business that was passed on to other customers through increased prices. Mr. McCullough advised that FCS currently had $1 million in payments being made by offenders to merchants; with an initial $25 set up fee for the payment program, without interest; and if there still was no restitution of the checks, prose- cution was an option, and would be taken to an agency or investigator, and if at a felony level, onto the Ramsey County attorney. Additional discussion included Police resources and manpower allocation; and participation by merchants and/or individuals. Councilmember Ihlan noted that this provided a service to merchants in collecting checks that may not otherwise be collected, and appreciated the educational por- tion of the service; however, opined that from the City's perspective, she had a problem determining that there was no financial cost to the City (i.e., Police De- partment and/or City Attorney) in coordinating the program; and questioned whether this was privatizing a public service. Councilmember Ihlan also ex- pressed reservations about the non-compete agreement and attempting to stifle governmental functions; and how this proposal served the mix of city prosecuto- rial authority and private business. Chief Sletner noted that a Roseville business owner having other business loca- tions in other suburbs, had requested that the City of Roseville also implement this program, speaking to its benefits. Mayor Klausing opined that, if this were merely a collection matter, there was no shortage of firms performing those services; however, further opined that this op- tion was attractive based on the diversion aspect, in addition to restitution, and gets people in a system outside the criminal justice system to provide for their fu-