My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Item B: Approval of Legislative Policies Document
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Agendas 2008
>
CC Agenda - 10/29/08 Work Session
>
Item B: Approval of Legislative Policies Document
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/9/2010 1:11:57 PM
Creation date
10/24/2008 10:41:53 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
City_Council_Document_Type
Agenda Item Summary
CMO_Meeting_Date
10/29/2008
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
39
PDF
View images
View plain text
City of Eugene Legislative Policies for 2009 Oregon Legislative Session <br /> <br />VI. <br />PS <br />UBLIC AFETY <br /> <br /> <br />A. MUNICIPAL COURTS <br /> <br /> <br />?Eugene supports increases for jail programs, including road and work crews. <br /> <br /> <br />?Eugene supports the ability to recover unpaid parking fees and fines by withholding vehicle <br />registration renewals. <br /> <br /> <br />?Eugene supports the ability to recover unpaid court fees and fines by attaching income tax <br />refunds through the State Department of Revenue. <br /> <br /> <br />?Eugene supports continued use of collection agencies. <br /> <br /> <br />?Eugene supports the ability of local authorities to use garnishment as a collections tool <br />without being required to register with the State Department of Revenue. <br /> <br /> <br />?Eugene supports a balance of the burden of uncollected fines and fees between the City and <br />the State. <br /> <br /> <br />?Eugene supports judicial discretion in the amount of assessments imposed, as well as <br />legislation to reimburse the City for the cost of collecting the mandated State and County <br />assessments. <br /> <br /> <br />?Eugene supports allowing local governments to equally share court security funds. <br /> <br /> <br />?Eugene opposes any unilateral increases in fines or assessments as means of increased <br />support to State-sponsored programs or activities. <br /> <br /> <br />?Eugene opposes any mandate on the types of cases which may or may not be heard in <br />municipal courts, while recognizing the limited jurisdiction of municipal courts. Local <br />government should have the right to set community standards and be able to maintain those <br />standards through public safety and justice activities. <br /> <br />Municipal courts provide a speedy and cost-effective way to deal with violations of the law, many <br />of which would not be heard in Circuit Court, with a focus on ensuring that sanctions are enforced, <br />including the collection of fines. Although the availability of jail space for municipal offenders <br />who are given mandatory jail sentences is important, Municipal Courts are also dependent on other <br />sanctions being available such as work crews, community service, and deferred prosecution <br />programs. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />18 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
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).