Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> MINUTES <br /> CITY COUNCIL <br /> <br /> JUNE 9, 2010 <br /> xAPPROVING PARTIAL PAYMENT #9 TO T.A. SCHIFSKY FOR <br /> 2009 RECONSTRUCTION; <br /> *APPROVING PARTIAL PAYMENT #I TO SUNRAM <br /> CONSTR UCTION FOR THE LITTLE CANADA ROAD BRIDGE <br /> PROJECT <br /> The foregoing resolution was duty seconded by Keis. <br /> Ayes (4). <br /> Nays (0). Resolution declared adopted. <br /> CLOSED The City Attorney requested that the Council go into closed session at <br /> SESSION the end of the regular Council meeting to discuss Valor litigation as well <br /> as Condit Street assessment appeals. <br /> FINES FOR The City Administrator noted that in February, the Council updated its <br /> ALCOHOL for tobacco violations to bring the City Code into compliance with State <br /> VIOLATIONS Statute. In doing so, the Council also looked at its f nes for alcohol <br /> violations relative to what other cities are charging. The City <br /> Adminisriator reported that at that time, the Council asked that the City <br /> Attorney as well as the Sheriffls Department comment on this issue. <br /> The City Attorney reported that his preference is that the City's ordinance <br /> remains as is for alcohol violation fines. He noted that the ordinance <br /> provides for the maximum civil penalty allowed under State Statute of <br /> $2,000. The structure of the ordinance allows the City Council flexibility <br /> to review violations on a case-by-case basis. "the City Attorney noted that <br /> in some cases there may be mitigating factors that would justify a lower <br /> fine while other violations may be egregious in natw•e. The City Attorney <br /> suggested that rather than amend the ordinance, the Council adopt a policy <br /> relative to these fines that can be used as a guideline in acting on <br /> individual vio]ations. <br /> McGraw asked if the Council would be bound by past actions relative to <br /> f nes imposed. The City Attorney reported that it would not. Violations <br /> could be considered on a case-by-case basis. <br /> The City Attorney suggested that the Council consider an alcohol <br /> violation/fine policy. Blesener suggested a policy based on the <br /> Maplewood fne schedule with perhaps a 36-month look-back period. The <br /> City Administrator stated that he would put a draft policy together for the <br /> Council's consideration using the Maplewood schedule as a starting point. <br /> 4 <br /> <br />