HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/03/2011, B 1 - INTRODUCTION OF NIGHTTIME CURFEW ORDINANCE counat McGyDry S�3
j ac,Enaa 12EpoRt am NumM
CITY O F SAN LUIS O B I S P O
FROM: Deborah E, Linden, Chief of Police QV
Prepared by Sean IC. Gillham, Patrol Sergeant
SUBJECT: INTRODUCTION OF NIGHTTIME CURFEW ORDINANCE
RECOMMENDATION:
Introduce an ordinance adding Chapter 9.50 to the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code prohibiting
minors under 18 years of age from being in public places from 11:00 P.M. to 5:00 A.M. daily
unless engaged in certain types of activities (Nighttime Curfew).
DISCUSSION
Background
Nighttime curfew ordinances for minors under 18 years old have been used effectively in many
communities to help deter and curb criminal activity and delinquent behavior by unsupervised
youth. The ordinances provide parents with a tool to reinforce their home curfew rules and
provide law enforcement with the legal ability to detain a minor and return them home before
they are caught engaging in criminal behavior. Generally, the ordinances apply to public places
and areas and contain a number of exceptions for minors who are engaged in activities which are
lawful or under adult supervision.
The City of San Luis Obispo does not have a nighttime curfew for minors under 18 years of age.
The County of San Luis Obispo and the remaining six cities — Arroyo Grande, Atascadero,
Grover Beach, Morro Bay, Paso Robles, and Pismo Beach—all have nighttime curfews, as do the
adjoining counties of Santa Barbara, Monterey, Fresno, and Kern, along with their respective
cities.
Staff researched the nighttime curfew ordinances in 25 cities and counties, including those listed
above. In most jurisdictions, violations of the ordinance were an infraction (the lowest level of
violation). The hours varied, with most beginning curfew at either 10:00 p.m. or 11:00 p.m. and
ending at 5:00 a.m. or 6:00 a.m. Some ordinances extend the hours to midnight on weekends.
The proposed nighttime curfew would be in effect from 11:00 p.m. to 5:00 a.m. daily and would
prohibit minors under 18 years of age from being in public places unless they are engaged in
activity that is exempt from the ordinance. Currently, minors under 18 can legally be out in
public at any hour and police officers cannot legally detain the minor unless reasonable cause
exists to believe the minor is engaged in criminal activity.
INTRODUCTION OF NIGHTTIME CURFEW ORDINANCE Page 2
Juveniles Contacts and Crime
The following table depicts the number of times minors were contacted in the City of San Luis
Obispo for either being a suspect in criminal activity, a victim of a crime,or other reason(such as
a runaway or missing person) between 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. (one hour before and after the
proposed curfew ordinance since incidents may overlap the curfew hours). The table also depicts
the number of minors under 18 years of age who were actually arrested for criminal charges
during curfew hours.
Year Contacts 10:00 :m:'=6:00 am.. '.Arrests 11 i00 .m.-5:00 a.m.
2006 112 26
2007 98 33
2008 98 18
2009 78 23
2010 69 20
Many of the arrests were for alcohol violations; however some minors were arrested for very
serious crimes including a 15 year old male in 2009 who was arrested for burglary and sexual
assault, and two boys, ages 12 and 13, who were arrested in 2005 for murder.
Access by minors to alcohol and drugs in our community is of particular concern due to the large
number of privately hosted parties, especially on weekend nights. Many of these gatherings are
hosted by local college students and have little or no controls in place over who attends. Each
year, intoxicated minors become victims of crimes, including sexual and physical assault-, require
medical treatment for alcohol overdose and related injuries; commit crimes in our community;
and drive while intoxicated. For example, during a two-week period in March/April 2011, two
14-year old minors were found so intoxicated in public places in the City that they required
medical treatment. The impacts of, and perceptions about, underage drinking are measured every
two years through the California Healthy Kids Survey of students at the seventh, ninth, and
eleventh grade levels. The following chart depicts responses by ninth and eleventh grade high
school students in the San Luis Coastal Unified School District to several alcohol and drug
related questions asked in the 2009/2010 survey:
Alcohol Use'by 1 Ph Grade Students' Grade 9 Grade it
Used alcohol ever 35% 63%
Used alcohol within past 30 days 19% 35%
Drunk or sick from alcohol 19% 43%
BinRe drank 5+ drinks in 1 setting) in past 30 days 11% 25%
Drove car after drinking . 18% 25%
Used alcohol or drugs ever 40% 65%
Used alcohol or drugs within past 30 days 23% 44%
Gotten high from drugs 20% 43%
Used marijuana ever 21% 460Yo
Perceive alcohol is easy to obtain 63% 76%
Perceive marijuana is easy to obtain 50% 75%
�1-2
INTRODUCTION OF NIGHTTIME CURFEW ORDINANCE Page 3
Proposed Ordinance
The proposed nighttime curfew ordinance would prohibit minors under the age of 18 (17 years
old or younger) from being in a public place or establishment open to the public in the City of
San Luis Obispo between the hours of 11:00 p.m. and 5:00 a.m. daily, unless the minors are:
1. Accompanied by their parent or guardian, or by a responsible adult;
2. On an errand at the direction of their parent or guardian, or a responsible adult;
3. In a motor vehicle involved in interstate travel;
4. Engaged in an employment activity, or going to or returning from an employment
activity;
5. Involved in an emergency;
6. On the sidewalk abutting the minors' residence;
7. Attending, or going to or from, an official school, religious, or other recreational activity
supervised by adults and sponsored by the City of San Luis Obispo, a civic organization,
or another similar entity that takes responsibility for the minor;
8. Exercising First Amendment rights protected by the United States Constitution;
9. Emancipated pursuant to law;
10. Going to or returning from any private place, without detour or stop;
11. Going to any of the activities listed above from a private place, or going from any of the
activities to a private place.
Nighttime curfew ordinances containing these exceptions have withstood legal challenges so it is
important to retain these exceptions in any version of the ordinance adopted by the Council. The
ordinance would provide police officers the authority to contact a minor in a public place who
appears to be under 18 years of age during curfew hours and, if the minor is found to be in
violation, return the minor to his/her parent/guardian in order to help ensure the minor's safety.
Prior to taking any enforcement action, officers would be required to ask the minor his/her age
and reason for being in a public place in order to determine if a curfew violation has occurred.
Public place means any place to which the public or a substantial group of the public has access
and includes, but is not limited to, streets, highways, parks, and the common areas of schools,
hospitals, office buildings, local transportation facilities, and shops.
A violation of the ordinance would be an infraction punishable by a fine and/or community
service (served during a time other than the minor's hours of school attendance or employment)
as follows:
151 offense: $100 fine and/or 10 hours of community service
2nd offense: $200 fine and/or 20 hours of community service
3`d (or more) offense: $250 fine and/or 25 hours of community service
Any parents or guardians who knowingly permit their minor child to violate the curfew could
also be charged with an infraction punished by a fine and/or community service as follows:
I"offense: $100 fine and/or 10 hours of community service
2"d offense: $250 fine and/or 25 hours of community service
B1-3
INTRODUCTION OF NIGHTTM4E CURFEW ORDINANCE Page 4
3rd (or more) offense: $500 fine and/or 50 hours of community service
The City Attorney also has the authority under the Municipal Code to charge violations as
misdemeanors for repeat and chronic offenders.
CONCURRENCES
In order to get feedback about the proposed ordinance, Police Chief Deborah Linden met with
San Luis Coastal Unified School District Superintendant Dr. Eric Prater to discuss the ordinance.
Dr. Prater distributed an information bulletin to the presidents of the parent-teacher associations
(PTA) in the district. In addition, Chief Linden attended a meeting of PTA Presidents to discuss
the ordinance. Those in attendance were supportive of the ordinance, especially as a tool to help
support parents in their efforts to reinforce home curfew rules. Feedback included the importance
of informing parents and their children about the new ordinance and the.need to contact parents
when a minor is issued a citation and ensure they get home safely. In addition, Residents for
Quality Neighborhoods (RQN)has expressed support for the ordinance.
FISCAL IMPACT
There are no direct general fund impacts associated with this action. Enforcement of the
ordinance would occur during police officers' normal work shifts.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Modify the_proposed ordinance. Simple modifications, such as to the curfew hours or fine
amounts, can be made by staff upon Council direction at the City Council meeting. If the
Council desires more substantial modifications to the proposed ordinance, the Council
should express what modifications are sought and direct staff to return with proposed
revisions for Council consideration. Substantive modifications to the exceptions outlined
in the ordinance are not recommended since the exceptions are necessary to ensure the
ordinance is legally defensible if challenged.
2. Decline to adopt the proposed ordinance. Should the Council decide not to adopt the
proposed ordinance, the Police Department would continue its current practice of contacting
minors when they are suspected of committing crimes (or are victims,runaways,etc).
ATTACHMENTS
1. Ordinance adding Chapter 9.50 to the City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code.
2. Curfew ordinance comparisons.
T:\Council Agenda ReportsTolice CAR\2011\Nighttime Curfew OrdinanceUntroduction of Nighttime Curfew 4-19-11.DOC
B1-4
Ordinance No. (2011 Series) ATTACHMENT I`i TTACHMENT I
Page 1 of 3
ORDINANCE NO. (2011 Series)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO ADDING
CHAPTER 9.50 OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO MUNICIPAL CODE ADDING A
CURFEW FOR MINORS
WHEREAS, the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo met in the Council Chamber of
City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on for the
purpose of considering changes proposed to the Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Council finds that minors engaging in criminal conduct or activities that
are likely to result in criminal conduct create a public health and safety risk; and
WHEREAS, access by minors to alcohol and drugs in our community is of particular
concern, especially on weekend nights; and
WHEREAS, many communities, including the other cities in San Luis County and
surrounding counties, have nighttime curfews for minors in order to deter criminal and
delinquent behavior by unsupervised minors late at night; and
WHEREAS, a nighttime curfew ordinance for minors would provide parents with a tool
to reinforce their home curfew rules and provide law enforcement with the legal ability to detain_
minors and return them home before they are caught engaging in criminal behavior.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. New Chapter 9.50 (Curfew) of Title 9 (Public Peace, Morals and Welfare)
of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code is hereby adopted to read as follows:
Chapter 9.50
CURFEW
Sections:
9.50.010 Definitions
9.50.020 Curfew Regulations
9.50.030 Penalties for Violations
9.50.010 Definitions
All defined terms in this Chapter appear in italics. For purposes of this Chapter,the
following definitions apply:
A. Curfew Hours means the period.from 11:00 p.m. any evening of the week, until 5:00 a.m.
the following day.
B. Emergency means an unforeseen combination of circumstances or the resulting state that
calls for immediate action. The term includes,but is not limited to, a fire; natural disaster, an
automobile accident or any situation requiring immediate action to prevent serious bodily injury,
loss of life or major damage to real property. "Serious bodily injury" means bodily injury that
8.1-5-
Ordinance No. (2011 Seg yes)
ATTACHMENT 1
Page 2 of 3
creates a substantial risk of death or that causes death, serious permanent disfigurement or
protracted loss or impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ.
C. Establishment means any privately-owned place of business to which the public is
invited, including but not limited to any place of amusement or entertainment.
D. Guardian means (1) a person who, under court order, is the guardian of a minor; or
(2) a public or private agency with whom a minor has been placed by the court.
E. Minor means any person under eighteen (18) years of age.
G. Parent means a person who is a natural parent, adoptive parent, or step-parent of
another person.
H. Private Place means any place that is neither a Public Place nor Establishment.
I. Public place means anyplace to which the public or a substantial group of the public has
access and includes, but is not limited to, streets, highways, parks, and the common areas of
schools, hospitals, local transportation facilities and shops.
J. Responsible Adult means a person at least eighteen (18) years of age, authorized by a
parent or guardian to have the care and custody of a minor, and not engaged in any unlawful
activity.
9.50.020 Curfew Regulations
A. It is unlawful for any minor to be present in any public place or on the premises of any
establishment within the City of San Luis Obispo during curfew hours.
B. It is unlawful for any parent or guardian of a minor knowingly to permit, or by
insufficient control to allow, the minor to be present in any public place or on the premises of
any establishment within the City of San Luis Obispo during curfew hours,
C. It is a defense to prosecution under section 9.50.020A or B that the minor was:
1. accompanied by the minor's parent or guardian, or by a responsible adult;
2. on an errand at the direction of the minor's parent or guardian, or the responsible
adult, without any detour or stop;
3. in a motor vehicle involved in interstate travel;
4. engaged in an employment activity, or going to or returning from an employment
activity to a private place without any detour or stop;
5. involved in an emergency;
6. on the sidewalk abutting the minor's residence;
7. attending an official school, religious, or other recreational activity supervised by
adults and sponsored by the City of San Luis Obispo, a civic organization, or another
similar entity that takes responsibility for the minor, or going to or returning from an
official school, religious, or other recreational activity supervised by adults and
sponsored by the City of San Luis Obispo, a civic organization, or another similar entity
that takes.responsibility for the minor to or from a private place without any detour or
stop;
8. exercising First Amendment rights protected by the United States Constitution, or
going to or returning from the exercising of those First Amendment rights to or from a
private place without any detour or stop;
9. travelling from an activity listed in section 9.50.020C to another activity listed in
section 9.50.020C, without any detour or stop;
10. emancipated pursuant to law;
11. going to or returning from any private place, without detour or stop..
D. Before taking any enforcement action under this section, a police officer shall ask the
apparent offender's ageand reason for being in the public place or on the premises of the
BI-6
Ordinance No. (2011 Se.,es) _ ATTACHMENT 1
Page 3 of 3
establishment during curfew hours. The police officer shall not issue a citation or make an arrest
under this section unless the officer reasonably believes that an offense has occurred and that,
based on any responses and other circumstances, no defense under section 9.50.020(c) is present
or applicable.
E. Each violation of this section shall constitute a separate offense.
9.50.030 Penalties for Violations
A Any minor violating section 9.50.020A is guilty of an infraction punishable by (1) a fine
not to exceed one hundred dollars and/or ten hours of community service for the first violation;
(2)a fine not to exceed two hundred dollars and/or twenty hours of community service for the
second violation; (3) a fine not to exceed two hundred fifty dollars and/or twenty-five hours of
community service for the third or subsequent violation of this section. Community service shall
be served during a time other than the minor's hours of school attendance or employment.
B. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Code, when a minor is charged with a
violation of this article, and a police officer issues a notice to appear, the charge shall be deemed
an infraction unless another disposition is elected under Welfare and Institutions Code Sections
601 or 602 or other applicable state laws.
C. Any parent or guardian violating section 9.50.02013 is guilty of an infraction punishable
by (1) a fine not to exceed one hundred dollars and/or ten hours of community service for the
first violation; (2) a fine not to exceed two hundred fifty dollars and/or twenty-five hours of
community service for the second violation; (3) a fine not to exceed five hundred dollars and/or
fifty hours of community service for the third or subsequent violation of this section.
INTRODUCED on the 19th day of April 2011 AND FINALLY ADOPTED by the Council of
the City of San Luis Obispo on the day of 2011, on the following
vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Mayor Jan Marx
ATTEST:
Elaina Cano
City Clerk
APP VED AS TO FORM:
Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
BI-7
ATTACHMENT 2
NIGHTTIME CURFEW COMPARISONS
Jurisdiction Infraction or Days and Times Other Info
Misdemeanor
SLO County" I 1 I pm-5am Sun-Thurs Cost recovery component
12am-5am Fri-Sat
Arroyo Grande M 11 m-6am Dail
Atascadero M I 1pm-Sam Dail
Grover Beach I 10 m-6am Dail
Morro Bay I I 1pm-5am Sun-Thurs Cost recovery component
12am-5am Fri-Sat
Paso Robles M I Ipm-6am Sun-Thurs
12-am-6am Fri-Sat, holidays,
summer
Pismo Beach I I 1 m-6am Dail
Santa Barbara County I I Opm-Sunrise Daily Penalty 1)$100 or 10 hrs
comm service 2)$250 or 25
hrs,3 $500 or 50 hrs
Lom oc . I 10 m-6am Daily Also daytime curfew
Santa Barbara City I IO m-Sunrise Daily Also daytime curfew
Santa Maria I 1 I m-6am Daily Also daytime curfew
Monterey County M 10 m-6am Dail
King City I 10 m-5am Dail
Monterey City 11 m-5am Dail
Salinas I 1 1 m-5am Dail
Fresno County M 10 m-5am Dail
Clovis M 10 m-Sunrise
Fresno City I 10 m-5am Daily Cost recovery component
Kern County I 10 m-5am Dail
Bakersfield I 10 m-5am Dail
Chico I 10 m75am Dail
Las Vegas I l Opm-5am Sun-Thurs
12am-5am Fri-Sat, holidays,
summer
Long Beach I 10 m-6am Daily Also daytime curfew_
Sacramento M 10 m-6am Dail
Santa Cruz I/M 11 m-5am Dail
1l 8
CL' 4r1aG
From: John Grady [mailto:jgradyslo@earthlink.net] Ta.' col A62
Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 10:15 PM AwrCtgri;&Ar
To: Council_ALL ��2AArcY
Subject: Curfew for minors
C«�
Dear Mayor and Council members,
'PSCC Cdu.rJ�c. A-t�c�
You likely consider me to be a conservative individual based upon my
previous remarks to you on other issues, so hopefully my comments that
follow will cause you to consider even more seriously what I have to
say here.
I am very disappointed in your tentative approval last night of the new
ordinance placing a curfew on minors, and I urge those of you who voted
for this measure on Tuesday evening to reverse your position at the
next vote on this ordinace. I strongly concur with Dan Carpenter's
emphatic 'NO' vote on this measure. I believe he stated in essence
that this is a parental issue and that the city has no business setting
such a curfew on minors. I also concur with Kathy Smith's opinion that
the fines proposed are onerous and that there is a serious lack of
comparison figures from other communities in our county to validate
that your proposed fines are reasonable when compared with those
assessed by our neighboring communities.
I agree with Dan Carpenter that the issue of when a minor is required
to be at home in the evening is a parental issue and that it is not in
the purview of the city of San Luis Obispo to mandate. In a few weeks
I believe that Mayor Marx will be recognizing and thanking scores of
our city's youth who are about to graduate from high school for their
combined thousands of hours of service to our community while in high
school. Will you, Mayor Marx, after thanking these youth for their
service to our community, also tell them that while you appreciate
their community service that they are not welcome to be seen in a
public place after 11 PM without being subjected to a fine and public
service? Is this the way we should treat our youth? What sort of
message does this send to our youth?
I have much more faith in and respect for our youth than apparently do
council members John Ashbaugh, Andrew Carter, and Mayor Marx. I
believe that to a great extent individuals live up to the expectations
that we place upon them. What sort of expectations are we setting for
our city's youth when we tell them we don't allow them nor can they be
seen in public places after certain hours on weeknights and weekends?
Have you such little faith in our youth that you only trust them in
public up to an arbitrary time?
We already have laws on the books to define what is acceptable and
unaccepatable behavior. If an individual breaks the law by exhibiting
unaccepatable behavior (regardless of age) , then our police officers
already have cause and authority to arrest this individual. Why should
age be a factor? Right is right and wrong is wrong regardless of age.
Why should a youth be subject to citation for simply being seen in
public after a certain arbitrary hour, such as leaving a movie theater
or getting a bite to eat at a restaurant or merely walking through the
downtown streets? Police Chief Linden proposed 11 PM as 'the hour' .
Council changed this to 12 PM on Friday and Saturday nights? Why 11
PM? Why 12 PM? Why not 10 PM or 1 AM? Why any hour??? This is all
so arbitrary and unnecessary!
I have three children, one in college, one in high school, and one in
middle school. My (now) college aged son used to like to attend the
bike event after Farmer's Market on Thursday nights on occassion,
particularly during the summer months. As he was on vacation at the
time (or had completed his homework) , I saw no harm in his
participation in this event so usually I would give him my permission
to participate. If this ordinance is passed, youth under the age of 18
would now be in violation of the curfew and would be cited and fined.
This is ridiculous! ! ! What harm is being done by a minor riding his or
her bike after 11 PM on a Thursday night? No harm at all, of course,
as you would all have to admit. But you just passed an ordinance to
make this behavior illegal! WHY?
Likewise, if my daughter wishes to attend an evening movie in the
summer, or on a school vacation break, and it lets out after 11 PM, she
too will be in violation of this proposed ordinance! This is
completely illogical! If she has my permission to attend a movie and
be home by midnight, why should you as the city council tell me (and
her) that this is unacceptable? Neither she (nor I) are doing anything
illegal, other than not abiding by an arbitrary time constraint imposed
by the city. This is completely arbitrary and wrong!
And if you are imposing a time curfew of 11 PM during the weekdays and
12 PM on Fridays and Saturdays, why is the time different on the
weekends? I presume because school is in session on Mondays through
Fridays? well, what about the summer months (and the vacation periods)
when school is not in session? Then a Monday (or any) evening is the
same as the weekend evenings to a minor as they have no school the next
day. This is not consistent nor does it make any sense.
In conclusion, I implore the three council members who supported this
ordinance at its first proposal to reverse your votes at the next
council meeting and reject this ordinance in its entirety. It is
unnecessary and is a complete overreach of your (and the city's)
authority into the lives of our residents. A minor's curfew is their
parents' responsibility, and unless they are violating the law they
should not be subject to fines or penalties arbitrarily imposed by the
city. We have laws enough on the books already to address any illegal
activity of our city's residents, regardless of their age. This
ordinance is uncalled for and is an affront to our community.
I urge you to oppose this ordinance.
Thank you.
Regards,
John Grady
San Luis Obispo
From: Poncho Meisenheimer[SMTP:PONCHO.MEISENHEIMER@PROMEGA.COM]
Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 9:39:35 AM
To: Council, SloCity
Subject: SLO Curfew
Auto forwarded by a Rule
Dear City Council,
Some City Council Members are afraid of the dark.San Luis Obispo's"happiest place" moniker
distilled in part from an extensive social fabric woven by both adults and minors.Council
members Manx,Ashbaugh, and Carter's support and passage of the SLO curfew deteriorates the
very foundation of trust between adults and minors. Granted some minors commit crimes as do
some adults, but the assumption that minors out after 11pm are destined for trouble represents
at best the mistrust of the parents and young people. Police Chief Deborah Linden's job may be
to propose restrictions in freedom which result in a "safer"community, but the City council
should balance these authoritarian proposals with a strong emphasis on the long term trust and
happiness of the SLO community. Shame on those council members who bowed to the fear of
the night.
Sincerely,
Poncho Meisenheimer
2868 Victoria Ave
SLO,CA 93401
i
��� council 11'1E11'1onAnbum
Lr-,
hard coyr. emai :
May 3, 2011 RED FILE o MYMOR o Fwrr=
MEETING AGENDA ° AWCM °MECHM° AMRM a PW DIR
TO: City Council DATES �� ITEM # �J a a PAW$UCM
° TRZM D UM D]R
VIA: Katie Lichtig, City Manager ° NRWTNB o RRDM
° LOCRYNM °CMNCR.
o CRY MOR
FROM: Deborah Linden, Chief of Police °ac
SUBJECT: Studies related to Effectiveness of Nighttime Curfew Ordinances
During the Agenda Review meeting on May 3, 2011, Council member Smith requested
information related to the effectiveness of nighttime curfew ordinances in cities that have
adopted such ordinances. During initial research in preparation of the ordinance, staff reviewed
the results of 1997 Conference of Mayors study; however the information was not included in
the agenda report due to the amount of time since the study. Staff was unable to locate a more
recent municipal study.
In response to Council member Smith's inquiry, staff conducted a quick on-line review of
available studies and located a more recent Department of Justice report that contains
consolidated information from other studies. The following is information from the 1997
Conference of Mayors survey specific to nighttime curfews, and from the Department of Justice
report which is attached to this memo.
1997 Conference of Mayors Survey:
In 1997, the U.S. Conference of Mayors surveyed 347 cities to determine the number of cities
with nighttime curfew ordinances and the effectiveness of such ordinances both statistically and
anecdotally. In 1997, nearly 80 percent of the cities surveyed reported having a nighttime curfew
for minors. San Luis Obispo was one of the 71 cities without a curfew that participated in the
survey.
The following are notable findings from the survey:
• Of the surveyed cities with nighttime curfews,nearly 90% reported that enforcing a
curfew represented a proactive way to combat youth violence,involve parents, deter
crime, and keep juveniles from being victimized.
• 88% of the surveyed cities with nighttime curfews said that curfew enforcement helps to
make streets safer for residents and resulted in positive outcomes, including residents
feeling safer and a reduction in graffiti and vandalism.
• 53% of surveyed cities with curfews reported a decrease in juvenile crime which they
attributed to the curfew.
Curfew Studies Summary Page 2
• Twenty-six cities were able to provide statistical data on the percent reduction in juvenile
crime. Juvenile crime was reduced by an average of 21% in these.cities, ranging from a
2% reduction in Charlotte to a 42% reduction in San Jose, California.
2009 Curfew Violation Literature Review by U.S. Department of Justice:
In October 2009, the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention, released a report outlining various studies related to the effectiveness of both
daytime and nighttime curfew ordinances. The report provides a summary of somewhat.
conflicting statistical analyses as well as theoretical and programmatic considerations of curfews.
Staff did not review the individual studies discussed in the Department of Justice report.
cuuz w Vmj-LjA'TF lmy!
LrMRA= D W/
Prepared for
U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
810 Seventh Street, NW
Washington, DC 20531
Prepared by
Martha Yeide
Development Services Group, Inc.
7315 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 800E
Bethesda, MD 20814
October 15, 2009
Prepared Under OJJDP Cooperative Agreement #2008-JF-FX-0072
aac�va.a.
' r
Curfew Violation Literature Review
Scope of the Problem
In response to a wave of increasing juvenile crime in the 1980s and 1990s, many communities
across the Nation either implemented or began enforcing curfew statutes already on the books. In
communities with age-based curfews, a violation constitutes a status offense. National figures,
including President Bill Clinton, have embraced curfews as a viable way of tackling the problem
of juvenile crime.
Curfew laws can vary depending on the hours specified, the locale affected, and the age group
included. In most jurisdictions, minors are required to be at home, generally between 11 p.m. and
6 a.m., though the times can vary somewhat depending on the day of the week and whether or
not school is in session. Some jurisdictions apply curfew to school hours as well. Many curfew
laws include exceptions for youth traveling to and from certain events (e.g., a school-, church- or
civic-sponsored activity),work, or responding to emergencies.
Juvenile curfew laws have become very popular in the United States over the past 20 years. The
U.S. Conference of Mayors conducted a survey in 1997 that found that 80 percent of cities
surveyed had a nighttime curfew for youth. A study done in 2000 found that the rate of increase
in cities with curfews was about 3 percent each year and that police have increased enforcement
efforts (Bannister, 2000, as found in Schwartz and Wang, 2005). Reports in the popular media
document the continued interest in enacting juvenile curfew laws. For instance, the City of
Rochester, N.Y., implemented a curfew in September 2006. As of winter 2008 the Memphis
(Tenn.) City Council was debating the need for a daytime curfew. Other communities that have
had curfew laws on their books for a considerable time are either rewriting them or stepping up
efforts to enforce them.
Often, curfew violators are diverted away from the juvenile justice system either through
diversion programs or by receiving a warning rather than a citation. Nonetheless, a significant
number of curfew violators are formally charged through the filing of a petition. According to
the Juvenile Court Statistics 2003, the number of petitioned curfew cases increased by 61 percent
between 1995 and 2000 (the cases rose from 11,900 to 19,200), but then decreased by 31 percent
through 2005. Curfew violations account for 9 percent of the petitioned status offense cases in
2005, down from 10 percent in 1995.
Theoretical Contexts
Juvenile curfews laws have appealed to liberals and conservatives alike, though usually for
slightly different reasons. For conservatives, curfews fit into an approach of more vigorous
enforcement efforts, more punitive sentencing, and increased social controls. For liberals,
curfews fit into the program of identifying juveniles in early stages of delinquency who could
benefit from intervention strategies(Adams, 2003). Additionally, the costs of enforcing curfews
are perceived as relatively low and the measures perceived as very effective (Adams, 2003).
2
Little empirical research has been done on the cost-effectiveness of curfew enforcement(Adams,
2003), so this remains an area where further research would be useful.
For some, curfews appear to present an opportunity to catalyze family involvement. Comments
made by those advocating for curfews make it clear that, for some, there is a connection between
curfew laws and parental accountability laws. This connection was expressed as early as 1896,
when Mrs. John D. Townsend commented, "[T]he curfew ordinance places responsibility where
it belongs, on the parents" (Townsend, 1896, 725, as qtd in Adams, 2003). In 2006, as New
Haven, Conn., weighed whether to enact a curfew law, Alderwoman Joyce Chen voiced regret
that such measures are "the only way we're seeing now to get parents involved" (Bass, 2006).
Curfew laws have been challenged on the grounds that they are unconstitutional. Arguments
have been based on the curfews' violation of the following rights: freedom of speech, equal
protection and due process, freedom of movement, and the right of parents to rear their children
(Schwartz and Wang, 2005). Courts have largely held up the right of jurisdictions to impose such
laws, if they meet certain legal criteria (e.g., the jurisdiction can provide data supporting that the
ordinance is tailored to fulfill a public safety need).
Indiana's experience with the curfew law serves as an example. In Hodgkins v. Peterson, the
curfew law was challenged on First Amendment and due process grounds. The district court
upheld the law. The defendant then appealed the decision in 2004 to the Seventh Circuit Court of
Appeals, which overturned the statute on the grounds that the law interfered with minors' First
Amendments rights and with parents' rights to raise their children as they see fit (National
Coalition for the Homeless, 2006): In response, Indiana amended the law so that First
Amendment rights were explicitly protected. Civil rights groups have said. they will not
challenge the newly amended law in court (Noblesville Daily Times, 2008). Similarly, in
Hutchins v. District of Columbia, the District of Columbia's law was challenged on the grounds
of due process and vagueness. The U.S. District Court found it unconstitutional but, upon a
rehearing, affirmed the ordinance.
Curfew Prevention and Intervention Programs
Although many jurisdictions have established procedures for handling curfew violators, few
offer curfew programs. Of those that exist, most view curfew violations as an opportunity to
offer diversion programs and services that can help families and youth avoid repeat offenses.
The SafeNite Curfew and Diversion Program, introduced in 1994 by Denver, Colo., aims to
reduce the number of juvenile perpetrators and victims of crime/violence and to alleviate court
congestion. Police take curfew violators who have not broken a criminal law to a SafeNite
location, where they are ticketed and a background check for prior violations is conducted.
Parents or guardians, who are called to the site to pick up the youth, may be cited for allowing
their children to violate the ordinance if their child has received three or more citations within a
short time. Youth are eligible for the diversion program based on their criminal record and the
circumstances surrounding the curfew violation. Once a youth has been identified as eligible for
the diversion program, the diversion officer completes an assessment of the youth that seeks to
identify and address issues that may have led to the curfew violation. These issues range from a
3
lack of knowledge about curfew to abusive home environments that have led youth to run away.
Diversion plans are unique to the individual and based on the assessment. Diversion plans can
include performing community service and attending workshops on issues such as problem
solving, anger management, mental health, substance abuse, and school problems. If the youth
completes a specified diversion plan, no court appearance is required and the ticket is dismissed.
Camden, N.J., introduced its curfew program in 2005. The goals of the Camden City Curfew
Project were to educate the community about Camden's curfew ordinance and to link young
people and their families with resources including youth development programs and social
services. The Project also aims to keep youth safe by removing them from public places during
the hours'when most violent crime occurs. Police take curfew violators to a neutral location,
where youth are screened against a current violator list, an open warrant list, and a missing
persons list. Parents or guardians are called to the site, where the curfew program is explained to
the youth and parent. The caseworker can offer a variety of services, ranging from classes to
emergency services; families also receive information about resources available in the
community that can address their needs. The caseworker follows up with the family a few days
later. If a youth is picked up three times, the parent or guardian is issued a Failure to Supervise
(MC§382-5) summons.
Evaluation Results
The rationale offered for curfews is twofold: it will decrease both juvenile delinquency and youth
victimization (Males and Macallair; 1999; National Criminal Justice Association, 1997). While
many perceive the statutes as effective and cite anecdotal evidence to illustrate the efficacy of
curfew statutes (OJJDP, 1996), most studies that have looked at the impact of curfew laws on
juvenile crime have generally concluded that there is little evidence that curfew laws make a
significant impact on juvenile crime rates (Adams, 2003; Gouvis, 2000; Males and Macallair,
1999). One study—which emphasized the methodological limitations of other studies and used a
different methodological approach—suggested that curfews are effective at curbing violent and
property crimes by juveniles(Kline, N.d.). Research has also shown that on school days juvenile
violent crime peaks in the hours following school, hours unaffected by curfew laws. On
nonschool days, juvenile violent crime peaks around 8p.m., falling quickly by 11 p.m. when
most curfews take effect (Snyder and Sickmund, 2006). Taking into consideration the number of
hours in the afterschool period compared to all other hours, the rate of crime in this after school
period is 6 times the rate during times covered by most curfews (Snyder and Sickmund, 2006).
The curfew programs do appear to reduce the number of curfew violations. A report issued by
the Senator Walter Rand Institute attributes the decrease in total number of juvenile arrests in
Camden City from 5,076 in 2006 to 3,814 in 2007 to the Camden City Curfew Program.
Likewise, 5 years after its inception, Denver had recorded a 26 percent decrease in juvenile
victims of crime and a 50 percent decrease in juvenile suspect rates (juveniles accused of or
alleged to have committed a crime) [SOPA].
Several studies also indicate that curfews may make an impact on juvenile trauma rates. Weiss
and colleagues (1998) examined pediatric emergency medical services (or EMS) transports
before and after the implementation of a New Orleans city curfew. They found that there was a
4
significant decrease in pediatric transports and in pediatric trauma transports (p < .01). Shatz,
Zhang, and McGrath (1999) found that the curfew law implemented in Dade County, Fla., led to
a significant decrease in pediatric trauma volume at the county's level-I trauma center during
curfew hours (p=.043), while rates remained stable during noncurfew hours. In a comparison of
cities with curfews and cities without curfews, Preusser, Zador, and Williams (1993) found that
curfews were associated with a 23 percent reduction in fatal injury for 13- to 17-year-olds for the
period of 9:00 p.m.to 5-59 a.m.
References
Adams, Kenneth. 2003. "The Effectiveness of Juvenile Curfews at Crime Prevention." Annals
587:136-59.
Bannister, Andra J., David L. Carter, and Joseph Schafer.2001. "National Police Survey on the
Use of Juvenile Curfews."Journal of Criminal Justice 29(3):233-40.
Bass, Paul. 2006. "New Haven Eyes Youth Curfew."New Haven Independent.
http://www.acluct.org/pressroom/n.ewliaveneyesyouthcurfew/, Jan. 25 (accessed July 22,
2008).
Noblesville Daily Times. 2008 "Curfew Ordinance Would Fine Teens and Parents for
Violations."
http://www.county29.net/cnis2/index.plip'?option=corn content&task=view&id=15128&Item
id=230, June 11 (accessed Aug. 1, 2008).
Gouvis, Caterina. 2000. Evaluation of the Youth Curfew in Prince Georges County, Maryland.-
Final
aryland:Final Report. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute.
Kline, Patrick. N.d. The Impact of Juvenile Curfew Law. Ann Arbor, Mich.: University of
Michigan Economics Department.
http:/hvwiv.econ.yale.edu/-pk279/papers/Youth%20curfews°/`201atest.pdf (accessed July 3,
2008).
Males, Mike, and Dan Macallair. 1999. "An Analysis of Curfew Enforcement and Juvenile
Crime in California." Western Criminology Review 1(2).
htti)://wer.sonoma.edu/v I n2/males.html (accessed July 22, 2008)..
National Coalition for the Homeless and the National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty,
2006. "A Dream Denied: The Criminalization of Homelessness in U.S. Cities."
hitt)`//wivw.nationathomeless.ore/publications/crimrcport/casesummarics 3.html (accessed
July 22, 2008).
National Criminal Justice Association. 1997. Juvenile Justice Reform Initiatives in the States:
1994-1996. Program Report. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of
Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice-and Delinquency Prevention.
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP). 1996.. Curfew: an Answer to
Juvenile Delinquency and Victimization? Juvenile Justice Bulletin.
http:/hwww.ncirs.eov/pdffilcs/curfew.pdf(accessed Feb. 24,2009).,
Preusser, David F., Paul L. Zador, and Allan F. Williams. 1993. `-`The Effect of City Curfew
Ordinances on Teenage Motor Vehicle Fatalities." Accident Analysis and Prevention
25(5):641-45.
Puzzanchera, Charles, and Melissa Sickmund. 2008. Juvenile Court Statistics 2005. Pittsburgh,
Pa.: National Center for Juvenile.Justice.
Safety Office of Policy and Analysis(SOPA). Denver, Colo.
5
Schwartz, Angie, and Lucy Wang. 2005. "Proliferating Curfew Laws Keep Kids at Home but
Fail to Curb Juvenile Crime." Youth Law News: Journal of the National Center for Youth
Law XXVI(1).
http://www.youthIaw.org/pubIications/yln/2005/ianuarymarch 2005/proliferating curfew la
ws keep kids at home but fail to curb juvenile crime/(accessed September 10, 2008).
Shatz, David V., Chi Zhang, and Mark McGrath. 1999. "Effect of a Curfew Law on Juvenile
Trauma."Journal of Trauma 47(6):1013-17.
Senator Walter Rand Institute of Public Affairs. 2008. Analysis of Camden City Curfew Project
Events: September 2005 Through December 2007. Camden, N.J.
Snyder, Howard N., and Melissa Sickmund. 2006. Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006
National Report. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs,
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
httr)://oiidp.ncirs.org/oistatbb/nr2006/iiidex.htm]..
Weiss, Steven J., James Couk, Mike Nobile, Amy A. Ernst, and William Johnson. 1998. "The
Effect of a Curfew on Pediatric Out-of-Hospital EMS Responses." Prehospital Emergency
Care 2(3):184-88.
6
RtL) FILE
MEETING AGENDA
From: Linden, Deborah PATE 3 / ITEM k--5-1
Sent: Monday, May 02, 2011 10:11 AM
To: Carter, Andrew
Cc: Lichtig, Katie; Visveshwara, Andrea; Dietrick, Christine; Staley, Chris; Gillham, Sean
Subject RE: Item Bl -- Curfew
Hi Andrew,
Andrea and I just conferred about this scenario. I suspect you were contacted by the same parent
who contacted me about the movie times (she is the parent of a 17 year old who likes to attend
movies with an 18 year old friend). The short answer is yes, the minor would technically be in
violation; however the chances of the minor being contacted if they left the theater directly and
drove straight home are very slim.
I did some checking of show times at the three theaters in our City(Fremont, Downtown Cinema
and Palm). Fremont and Downtown usually have two evening/night showings of each movie. The
evening showings start at between about 6:00 pm and 8:30 pm, so these movies would generally
let out before the 11:00 pm curfew starts. The late night showings start between about 9:20 pm
and 10:20 pm, so these movies would generally let out after the 11:00 pm curfew begins.The
Palm theater does not have a late night showing usually, so the 7:00 pm showing would certainly
be out before curfew. Here is chart with the times`
Theater EVenin...show start time Tate show staif-time
Fremont Between 6:00 pm &8:10 pm Between 9:45 pm & 10:20 pm
Downtown Cinema Between 7:00 pm &8:30 pm Between 9:20 pm & 10:20 pm
Palm 7:00 pm None
The fact that there is usually an evening showing of movies that gets out before curfew provides a
viable alternative for unsupervised minors to attend a movie without being in violation of the
curfew, and without being out late at night without supervision. It is not a problem if the minor is
attending the late showing accompanied by a parent or responsible adult.
Should the Council wish to provide the ability for minors to be out later for these types of
activities, you can direct staff to modify the hours of the ordinance. Some ordinances in other
communities provide for a midnight curfew on Friday and Saturday nights. A few provide for
midnight curfew during school breaks and summer, but this gets tough because different school
have different break schedules. It is also important to keep in mind that any hours modifications
would apply to younger teens, not just to 17 year olds (and as I mentioned in the report, we have
problems with younger teens as well as the older ones)so the policy question for the Council
regarding hours is how late do you feel it is appropriate for unsupervised teens and children to be
out in public(and not engaged in one of the exceptions).
The Council can certainly direct changes to the hours, and even to the age limit; however Andrea
and I would not suggest adding or changing an exception to accommodate movies since this
would get very complicated.
Deb
herd coyr. emaf:
From: Carter, Andrew a WYMOR o FffDM
AWCM CMF
Sent: Sunday, May 01, 20117:50 PM o oPWD3
To: Linden, Deborah o cue MMG o route
Cc: Lichtig, Katie o rRMM o uT�at�Racnnt
Subject: Item B1 — Curfew o �� o��
o CaYMOR
o CLM
At the Council meeting, I'll be interested in how the proposed ordinance impacts minors
attending a late showing at the Downtown Cinema or other movie theatre.
As I read the ordinance, if a movie extends past 11 pm, minors watching the movie would be in
violation of the curfew ordinance even if their parents/guardians had given them permission to
attend the movie and even if the minors went directly home at the conclusion of the movie.
Andrew Carter
Council Member
City of San Luis Obispo
May 2,2011
San Luis Obispo resident, Heather Smith, called in to register her opinion of the
introduction of the Nighttime Curfew. She does not think she will be able to attend the
May 3 Council meeting, but wants Council to know that she thinks that this type of
curfew should be the responsibility of parents and not of government.
Sue Chippendale
City Clerk's Office
hard email:
o COUNCIL a CI),;ou:
° `n"MGR °i`n"" RED FILE
a ASSTCM a Er HIEF
o � o ouCEC� MEETING AGENDA
o TTRUWNE o�s�t�cnm DATES 3 It ITEM #-I3 I
o NEWTIM o HR DIR
o SLOCrffNEM oCOUNCD.
o M horn
a aax
I
From: Eric Morgan [mailto:eric.morgan@centurionprivatesecurity.com]
Sent: Monday, May 02, 20119:26 PM
To: Linden, Deborah
Subject: NIGHTTIME CURFEW FOR MINORS
Chief,
I understand that the City Council intends to consider a nighttime
curfew for minors tomorrow night. I would like to provide public comment
in support of this however; I it is unlikely that I will be able to make the
meeting tomorrow night. Would you mind forwarding this email on to the
Council members for consideration?
I am in full support of this and would appreciate it if you could share some
of you supporting facts and figures. We can also add some of the
contacts that we have had requiring Law Enforcement presence.
We have also had circumstances where unattended minors were contacted
and Law Enforcement was not required. I.E. when a crime had not yet
been committed yet but the individuals where caught in the act with the likely
intent of committing a crime. I believe that such a situation could have been
avoided with a standing curfew. We have also had numerous issues with
minors trespassing on private property (after 11:00PM) and have had to
contact Law Enforcement, each time, due to safety and liability concerns.
Thank you in advance for your assistance.
Very Respectfully,
Eric Morgan
Owner, Centurion Private Security RED FILE
895 Napa Ave., Suite A-3 MEETING AGENDA
Morro Bay, CA 93442-1663
(805)464-9640 DATE-� ITEM # g�_
(805) 772-5364 Fax.
eric.morgan@centurionprivatesecun'ty.com
www.centurionprivatesecurity.com
�co email:
a (MIM L o CDDDIR
c CnYMGR a RTDIR
o AWCM a FMCHW
a ATFOFMY a PWDIR
•c G a POLKECHW
o PARRS@RECDIR
a Sj,GNEWS o CCOUDNM
Ila aryMOR
a CLERK