Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Administrative Search Warrant topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Rolla council adopts changes to administrative search-warrant rules after debate
Summary
The Rolla City Council approved amendments to Chapter 28 of the city code governing administrative search warrants (Ordinance 4892) after voting down one proposed strict change and adopting several clarifying amendments, with a 9–1 roll-call vote.
City Counselor Todd Smith read Ordinance 4892 for final reading, describing proposed updates to the city’s administrative search-warrant process.
During debate, Councilmember William Hahn proposed replacing the ordinance’s notice-and-contact requirements with language requiring that "the application shall state the court case number, date when the violation was filed and the outcome was found guilty." That amendment failed by voice vote, recorded as 1 Aye and 9 Nays.
Hahn then successfully proposed an alternative amendment requiring applications to state the court case number and the date the violation was filed and to prohibit issuance "before the defendant is found guilty or is issued a warrant for failure to appear." Council approved that amendment unanimously.
Council also approved an amendment changing language that referenced "10 days after" to instead read "within 10 days of issuance of warrant," and an amendment to Section 28-13(C) to require written consent of the Community Development Director. Both passed unanimously.
After the amendments were adopted, the council voted to approve Ordinance 4892 as amended. A roll call vote showed nine ayes and one no (Councilmember Aaron Pace voted no). The ordinance will update the administrative search-warrant procedures in Chapter 28 of the Rolla City Code.
The ordinance and the amendments were discussed on the council floor; no additional formal challenges or legal citations were recorded during the meeting.
