A. In determining whether diversion of a defendant is in the interest of justice and of benefit to the defendant and the community, the city attorney shall consider at least the following factors among all factors considered:

1. The nature of the crime charged and the circumstances surrounding it;

2. Any special characteristics or circumstances of the defendant;

3. Whether the defendant is a first-time offender of an alcohol-related offense and if the defendant has previously participated in the diversion, according to the certification of the division of vehicles of the state Department of Revenue;

4. Whether there is a probability that the defendant will cooperate with and benefit from diversion;

5. Whether the available diversion program is appropriate to the needs of the defendant;

6. The impact of the diversion of the defendant upon the community;

7. Recommendations, if any, of the involved law enforcement agency;

8. Recommendations, if any, of the victim;

9. Provisions for restitution; and

10. Any mitigating circumstances.

B. A city attorney shall not enter into a diversion agreement in lieu of further criminal proceedings on a complaint alleging a violation of an alcohol-related offense if the defendant has previously been convicted of or plead nolo contendere to a violation of an alcohol-related offense in this state. (Prior code § 4-904)