St. Paul City Council approves charter amendment to allow administrative citations

After years of advocating for the power to impose non-criminal fines on rulebreakers, the St. Paul City Council voted 7-0 on Wednesday to amend the city charter to give itself the power to do just that.

The council also adopted a resolution to establish a committee that, with an eye to racial and economic equity, will review their proposed administrative citations as they’re rolled out this next year.

St. Paul Mayor Melvin Carter and individual council members have long bemoaned the fact that of the state’s 25 largest cities, St. Paul is the only one that does not grant its city council the power to amend city ordinances and impose fine ladders or other administrative penalties when rules are broken.

Advocates for workers, renters and other groups have maintained that’s left city officials with “all or nothing” enforcement tools, such as turning a blind eye when an errant landlord, employer or property owner violates an ordinance, or revoking their licenses entirely and charging them with a crime prosecutable in a court of law. Organizations such as ISAIAH, the St. Paul Regional Labor Federation, Sustain St. Paul and Unidos St. Paul have called administrative citations a happier medium that would allow the city to hold scofflaws accountable without emptying residences, shuttering businesses or creating a criminal record.

“With this charter change, St. Paul residents – who deserve the city on their side in every way they need it – can expect more effective code compliance when dealing with issues like our largest problem landlords who neglect both commercial and residential properties, or employers who exploit their workers,” said Council President Mitra Jalali, in a written statement issued after the vote.

Process far from over

The process to allowing the council to adopt administrative citations is far from over.

Peter Butler, a former city employee, said this week he will seek to collect 2,000 voter signatures to get the amendment frozen and then placed on the November ballot for public review unless the council withdraws it. He has 60 days to submit those signatures.

The council vote does not commit the city to any particular type of citation.

Jalali and other members have taken pains to emphasize they’re required to consider each city ordinance separately, taking future administrative penalties through their own amendment and public hearing process before adoption.

A year-long committee

On Wednesday, just prior to the council vote to amend the city charter, Council Member Anika Bowie submitted a resolution committing the council to establish a temporary advisory committee that would spend the next year crafting an “equitable implementation framework” around future citations. Her goal is to ensure that revenue from administrative citations is used to help property owners comply with city ordinances, rather than used to prop up the budgets of city departments.

Bowie’s resolution calls for the “Administrative Citations Legislative Advisory Committee” to be established within 90 days, and to consist of one or more members with an academic background in city enforcement, a representative of a labor union, an attorney or member with a legal background, a representative of a neighborhood district council, and a community expert on fines and fees. The committee also would include a member of the city’s new racial reparations commission, an independent research organization and city staff.

The committee is expected to issue its recommendations in a written report within a year and then disband, focusing on the potential disparate impacts of administrative citations on vulnerable groups protected by the city’s Human Rights Ordinance.

Jalali said rather than delay administrative citations another year, she expected the implementation committee to review the council’s proposed administrative citations as they roll out “in tandem … as we update ordinances one-by-one.”

‘Direct communication’

The council voted 7-0 to adopt Bowie’s resolution, but not without some feedback.

Council Member Nelsie Yang said the prospect of adding a year-long committee effort had been raised late in discussions, and she had seen no specific language around Bowie’s proposal until last week. She said she was nonetheless grateful that the committee had a firm deadline to get its work done.

“The timing when the first draft of this resolution was shared with us … was not ideal at all,” said Yang, addressing Bowie. “This is not a call out but a call in to you to invite us into conversations. … When you have something urgent, let us know.”

Council Member Cheniqua Johnson echoed the sentiment. “I appreciate that the edits that we have were well received,” Johnson said. “Prior to this discussion, I was really uncomfortable in supporting this resolution in how quickly it came about.”

“Direct communication — that’s what I feel like happened today,” Johnson added. “I will support this today. I’m mostly looking forward to the ongoing conversations, not only looking at the findings of the committee … (but that) we can vote on future ordinances and resolution language with plenty of time, and with plenty of time to collaborate.”

As part of the city budget process, Bowie also called for annual departmental reporting to describe public engagement efforts around administrative citations, periodic review of the city’s fine and fee policies, and annual reports on collection rates, revenues and their allocation, “and to the extent possible, data collection on demographic impacts.”

Council Member Rebecca Noecker praised those efforts, saying the resolution “makes sure we apply this in a way that doesn’t hurt the people it’s intended to protect.”