Currently, University students are charged with criminal offenses for such things as zoning violations and nuisance parties. But some city officials want to give police the option of whether to issue civil violations instead, according to Matt Reger, city prosecutor, who spoke last night to the Undergraduate Student Government.

The proposed changes under the Civil Infractions Ordinance are intended to benefit University students, according to Reger.

Many students have gotten criminal charges in the past for quality of life offenses that remain on their records after graduation, Reger said.

“It’s meant to give students options so they don’t get a criminal violation,” Reger said.

The procedures for the civil violations will be similar to that of parking ticket violations, according to Reger.

After the city receives a complaint, an officer will give the offender notice of the violation, and the offender will have 24 hours within receiving the notice to correct the violation. If the problem is not corrected within 24 hours, then a civil infraction will be cited.

Under the proposed law, officers issuing the citation will still have the option of issuing a criminal citation.

Not having a standard for whether citations would be civil or criminal concerned senators, including Bernard Little, vice-president.

“The students have had a problem with the city in regards to how the police treat us,” Little said. “What mandates [police] to make it civil? Who’s holding officers accountable?”

But Reger believes that leaving the type of citation up to the officer will be more beneficial than harmful to students.

Currently, students only have the option of receiving a criminal violation for quality of life offenses, but under the new law, officers will have the option of giving out a civil violation instead, Reger said.

John Quinn, mayor, told senators he would promote the use of the civil violation.

“If this passes, we’re going to be encouraging people to use this option whenever possible, and that’s better than the options you currently have,” Quinn said.

The option of a criminal violation is left open mainly for repeat offenders and violations that are more serious, such as fighting.

If this new ordinance is passed, offenders would have several courses of action to take after receiving the civil infraction.

The first option is to pay the fine. Class A offenses, such as jaywalking, barking dogs, and litter will incur $50.00-$100 fines. Class B offenses, which include second time Class A violations, nuisance party, and snow removal violations, will have $75-$150 fines. Class C violations, which include repeat Class B violation, will be $150-$300, and Class D, including zoning violations, will be $500-$1000 fines.

But offenders also will have the option of asking for a hearing with the city magistrate, the result of which can be appealed to the civil court.

Offenders’ third option is to write a letter of explanation.

If the problem is corrected within 10 days after the civil infraction is cited, offenders will receive a 75 percent reduction of their fine.

The city is modeling its plan after Oxford, Ohio’s ordinance, according to Reger.

Because Oxford has been perfecting its ordinance over time, Bowling Green was able to take and use what worked best in Oxford’s ordinance, Reger said. The city also researched a similar ordinance in Cincinnati.

The City Council will have a third reading of the ordinance on October 3 at their meeting.

Aaron Shumaker, president, believes the change will be positive for students.

Many students don’t get jobs because of criminal records, Shumaker said.

“This is such a step in the right direction because it gives the officer another option.”