The ad hoc committee created to address the controversial minor offenses ordinance has been chugging along for the past couple of months, and will take up two major community concerns next week.
The committee will discuss and take public comment on whether the manager should be allowed to deputize certain borough employees to issue citations. It will also address whether violations should be treated as civil penalties handled through city hall or criminal penalties that go through the court system.
“I think that’s a big topic for folks, so if they want to weigh in, they should submit comments or come to the meeting,” said committee member Margaret Friedenauer.
The meeting begins 5:30 p.m. Thursday, Dec. 17.
At its Nov. 30 meeting, the committee received a revised draft of the ordinance from borough attorney Patrick Munson. Munson made clear the revisions were only suggestions based on input provided by the committee.
Changes included keeping the power and process for issuing citations in the hands of police officers rather than deputized borough employees. According to the revision, designated employees could give sworn statements to police officers responsible for writing tickets.
The revised draft also softened some language and includes specific discretion for officers to give warnings instead of citations.
“We amended language throughout the ordinance to eliminate the use of certain terms such as ‘convicted’ and ‘guilty’ based on the idea that a minor offense is not intended to connote criminal behavior. It’s just a violation,” Munson said.
The committee also discussed the potential of handling violations through the administration instead of the court system. Making the violations civil penalties keeps them entirely outside of the “minor offenses rules” and requirements of an Alaska Supreme Court decision issued in 2013.
“A civil fine by definition means you end up doing this whole proceeding in city hall with either the borough manager or a designee as a hearing official who has to sit kind of as a judge on anyone who requests a hearing to challenge whether they committed the offense they are accused of or not,” Munson said.
Skagway handles its violations as civil penalties.
Committee member Deborah Vogt asked if the borough could just make all the violations into civil penalties and be done with the matter.
“Yes, you can define them all as civil fines, but no, you would not just be done with it,” Munson said. “You would then have to set up your city hall enforcement system, which, … at least in our view, is not an efficient use of borough resources because it puts all of the enforcement on city hall rather than in the court.”
Some violations are already handled this way, like nuisance abatement orders. Residents notified by borough staff that they have violated a nuisance law can appeal that decision to the assembly. The assembly then must sit and hear the case. If the assembly upholds the decision, residents can appeal the decision to Superior Court.