St. Paul Residents Debate Administrative Citations Ahead of Vote

Residents of St. Paul, Minnesota, are gearing up for a significant vote on November 7, 2023, concerning the implementation of Administrative Citations. This measure, known as City Question 1, would empower the city to issue fines for violations of local ordinances, a tool currently unavailable in St. Paul. Proponents argue that the city’s lack of this authority has hindered accountability, particularly regarding properties that have long been neglected.

Chris Olendorf, co-lead of the Housing, Zoning & Development Committee of Sustain Saint Paul, supports the measure. He highlights the case of an abandoned CVS on Snelling Avenue, which has been left to deteriorate despite numerous calls to law enforcement over three years. “With administrative citations, we could have had accountability and responsibility long ago,” Olendorf stated, emphasizing the need for a more effective approach to property management and public safety.

Opposition to the measure has raised several arguments, which Olendorf seeks to address. One claim is that the City Council has attempted to sidestep voter involvement. He counters this by noting that Minnesota state law has permitted such charter amendments since 1973, allowing for either unanimous City Council approval or a referendum through petition. The discussions around City Question 1 have included rigorous vetting, with three public hearings held over three months.

Another contention from opponents is that the proposal primarily benefits “city special interests.” Olendorf refutes this assertion, stating that the measure has garnered support from numerous labor, faith, and community organizations, including the St. Paul Regional Labor Federation AFL-CIO and HOME Line.

Critics have also claimed that the initiative is merely a means to generate revenue for the city. Olendorf clarifies that the charter amendment received unanimous approval specifically with the condition that it would not serve as a revenue-raising tool. He points out that the City Council has committed to forming an advisory committee to ensure the fines are implemented equitably and that any funds collected are reinvested into community support services such as affordable housing and worker protections.

In a contrasting viewpoint, Jerry Wynn, a Vietnam War veteran, reflects on today’s protests, drawing parallels between past and present sentiments of dissent. He comments on the current political climate, stating, “I hate our president but love our country,” suggesting a disconnection between leadership and public sentiment.

Others, like John Fineberg, express concern over broader societal issues, likening the experience of being deceived by a con artist to the political climate. Fineberg warns that recognition of wrongdoing often comes too late, leaving citizens vulnerable to loss.

Judy Schultz calls for fiscal prudence in St. Paul, arguing that the city should reevaluate its spending priorities. She criticizes projects like a proposed bike path on Summit Avenue as unnecessary expenses. Schultz advocates for a focus on attracting businesses to downtown St. Paul to alleviate financial burdens on homeowners and suggests conducting audits to ensure responsible resource allocation.

As the vote approaches, the debate over Administrative Citations highlights a crucial moment for St. Paul. Residents will decide whether to embrace a system that proponents argue could foster accountability and improve community standards or to reject an initiative they believe may not serve the city’s best interests.