Laserfiche WebLink
<br />CASSCOUNlY <br />GOVERNMENT <br /> <br />..I.. <br /> <br />State's Attorney <br /> <br />Birch I~ Burdick <br /> <br />Assistant State's <br />Attorneys: <br /> <br />Mark R. Bocnin)- <br />Tracy J. Peters <br />Lisa K. Fair ~vlcEwrs <br />Trent W tvbhler <br />Aaron li. BiN <br />brle R. Mwrs, Jr. <br />Leah J. h,te <br />ReId .A. Rr:lllv <br />Kar:l Schmit: Olslon <br />}1l1athan H. P. Anderson <br /> <br />Victim/Witness <br />Coordinators: <br /> <br />BrenJa (lls\ lll- WL1Y <br />Debbie Tibiat'lwski <br /> <br />Check Division/ <br />Restitution: <br /> <br />Linda \X{,rkin <br />Charl,ltte }lhns\ln <br /> <br />H, 'x 2Sl"(1 <br />21] Ninth SfI\'l't S\ ,llth <br /> <br />Fargo. Nimh P:lk'lt;, iKIOK <br /> <br />PH: 701241, ilii',1 <br />hx: 7t~!-24!.i'iH <br /> <br />RECEIVEli <br />MAR 1 4 2005 <br /> <br />.t~{1./~~l ~ ,I I <br /> <br />/1 .,,, <br />.,' !, ..,.'. <br />- ",(.. '" oJ <br /> <br />MEMORANDUM <br /> <br />CASS COUNTY COMMISSION <br />TO: Cass County Commissioners <br /> <br />~....4 ,. <br /> <br />!,>, '., 'l ! <br /> <br />FROM: <br /> <br /> <br />Ji,.t <br /> <br />Birch P. Burdick <br />Cass County State's Attorney <br /> <br />DATE: <br /> <br />March 14, 2005 <br /> <br />RE: <br /> <br />Court Services Agreement - County Ordinances <br /> <br />* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * <br /> <br />Cass County has enacted, and is in the process of considering further <br />enactments of, ordinances under the Home Rule Charter. Some of those <br />ordinances now, and may in the future, contain provisions relating to <br />possible enforcement through the District Court. <br /> <br />By way of historical perspective, cases that arose under county <br />ordinances would have been handled by the "County Court", rather than <br />the District Court. In 1995 the courts were consolidated. No particular <br />provision was made for hearing county ordinances at that time. The <br />Legislature in 2003 provided District Courts with the express authority to <br />hear cases arising under county ordinances, but did not otherwise provide <br />a specific mechanism for doing so. For the last several years we have <br />been working under an informal agreement with the Court. It is <br />appropriate to commit that understanding to a formal written agreement, <br />particularly given that the potential scope of cases that may be heard by <br />the Court is expanding as the County's ordinances are expanding in <br />number and type. <br /> <br />The District Court here, and in other jurisdictions, has agreements with <br />municipalities (and home rule charter counties) to hear cases that require <br />a jury and therefore cannot be heard in the municipal court. Those <br />agreements provide for a division of fines, fees and costs between the <br />court and the municipality. <br /> <br />Enclosed is a draft agreement submitted by our Presiding Judge. It <br />contains terms similar to those incorporated into agreements with other <br />municipalities/counties. I draw your attention to a few provisions because <br />they may have financial implications: <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />County will pay any indigent defense costs that may arise. <br /> <br />Page 1 of 2 <br />