1986-12-09 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I I I Council Meeting Minutes Oecember 9, 1986 Council Business, continued Williams asked how much of our business is jury business which would be transferred; LeFevere indicated we don't know what they are proposing to move, and a person would not know whether or not a jury trial will be needed because many things scheduled do not come to be a full jury trial and we don't know when the decision is made to move the trial downtown. If state statute permits the judges to remove jury trials, Brandt asked what is to prevent them from moving all court activities; LeFevere indicated nothing could prevent them. LeFevere stated he looked into the matter and would like to look at a few more things before giving the city a decision; but believes if the city and the court system are at logger heads, it would be better to settle before going to legislature, where perhaps everyone would lose everything. LeFevere further stated even if the city were to sue the Ramsey County Courts and prevail on the theory that the statute did not authorize them to withdraw at least criminal matters from the courts, that Ramsey County would attempt to get a legislative solution. It seems the best first step would be to see what kind of support we can gather from other cities that feel the same as we do; perhaps even other cities who don't have courts in their cities but would rather have them close by than in downtown St. Paul. That unification would perhaps give us a better showing when speaking with the court people; and we may be able to get a legislative solution to our advantage to clear up the ambiguities in the statute. LeFevere could not advise a law suit as a long term solution. Schmidt stated at the last Ramsey County League of Local Govern- ments meeting the issue was raised and discussed again; he sensed (although there were only representatives from 13 cities present) the issue is still being hotly debated among those cities and some cities had not really been clear about the action that was being contemplated. Schmidt sensed is if there are cities that wish to retain the operation and control of the courts in their cities for the violations that occur in their cities, they are willing to support the cities and, based on his observance and the action that was taken, doesn't think they will give carte blanche to the courts to consolidate in one location. Schmidt didn't believe the county would have the votes to consolidate if the cities could have access to their legislators. Sinda stated that was also his impression. Benke stated we need to continue exploring to see if there are opportunities for reaching an accommodation without going to legislature; asked staff to work further in pinpointing the prob- lem. Page Eleven