My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2006_0620_Packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2006
>
2006_0620_Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/12/2014 12:51:49 PM
Creation date
8/26/2009 3:34:59 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
214
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
��' �r- ����F�'ELl.� <br />Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs (continued) <br />Year Ended December 31,2005 <br />2005-2 CITY A�3M�iXSTTtATT'VE PENALTIES <br />1. Finding <br />Minnesota Statute § 169.022 states that all political subdivisions, municipalities, and local <br />authorities shall not enact or enforce any rule or regulation in conflict with the provisions <br />of Minnesota Statute � 169 unless expressly authorized within the statute. Local <br />authorities may adopt traffic regulations which are not in conflict with the provisions of <br />this chapter, provided that when any local ordinance regulating traf�c controls covers the <br />same subject for which a penalty is provided for in this chapter, then the penalty provided <br />for violation of local ordinance shall be identical with the penalty provided for in <br />Minnesota Statute § 169 for the same offense. <br />The City's police department was issuing civil penalties for seat belts and expired plates at <br />a lower rate than the rate set by the state in Minnesota Statute � 169, with all fees collected <br />being retained by'.��� City. <br />2. Recommendation <br />We recommend the City discontinue the practice of issuing civil penalties for seat belts <br />and expired plates at a lower rate than the rate set by the State in Minnesota Statute � 169. <br />3. Management's Response <br />The City discontinued the practice in mid-2005 <br />2005-3 CLAIMS DECLARATION <br />1. Finding <br />Minnesota Statues § 471.38 and � 471.391 state that no claims shall be paid until the <br />claimant presents an itemized statement in writing or electronic transactionrecord. The <br />statutes also state that the claimant must sign a declaration ia the effect that such <br />account, claim, or demand is just and correct and that no part of it has been paid. The <br />claim may be paid without this declaration as long as the checic order has placed above <br />the �ndorserrze�t area a statement to the same effect. <br />Since vendors paid through electronic rti� transfers do not endorse a city checic, the <br />City must obtain this declaration through other means; preferably through a declaration <br />on the vendor invoice. <br />2. Recommendation <br />We recommend the City obtain a signed declaration to the effect that such account, <br />claim, or demand is just and correct and that no part of it has been paid on all payments <br />of the City including eleetrozzie fund transfers. <br />3. Management's Response <br />It is recognized that the current statute was enacted prior to the development and use of <br />electronic (non-checic) payment systems. The City, along with most municipalities, are <br />worlcing with the League of Minnesota Cities, Minnesota Banlcers Association, and other <br />groups to amend state statutes in a manner that will accommodate the widespread use of <br />electronic payments. <br />-lti�- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.