Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-02-1997 Special Council Mtg CITY OFAUBURN SPECIAL MEETING OF THE AUBURN CITYCOUNCIL June 2, 1997 5:30 PM Minutes The Special Meeting of the Auburn City Council convened at 5:35 p.m., Monday, June 2, 1997 in the Council Work Area at Auburn City Hall. Those in attendance included Mayor Booth and the following members of the City Council: Rich Wagner, Trish Borden, Sue Singer, Jeanne Barber, Gene Cerino, and Stacey Brothers. Councilmember Fred Poe was excused from the meeting. Staff members present included: City Attorney Michael J. Reynolds, Assistant City Attorney Judy Ausman, Finance Director Diane L. Supler, Police Chief Dave Purdy, Parks and Recreation Director Dick Deal, and City Clerk Robin Wohlhueter. I. Introduction Mayor Booth briefly explained the purpose of this evening's special meeting is to provide an opportunity to brief the Council on juvenile crime statistics and to discuss further development of a curfew ordinance. The meeting is informational only, and the Council will not take action on any issues during the meeting. Assistant City Attorney Judy Ausman presented background information and related data with regard to the development of a curfew ordinance in the city of Auburn. II. Crime/Juvenile Statistics Utilizing an overhead slide, Assistant City Attorney Ausman presented charts which include statistics on the number of arrests arising from incidents during proposed curfew hours, number of arrests by age, and the number of juvenile felony arrests. (The charts are attached as part of these minutes.) Ms. Ausman explained the data was compiled by the Auburn Police Department for the year 1995 and January through October 1996. There were 612 juvenile arrests in 1995 and 500 juvenile arrests during the first ten months of 1996. Five alternative curfew hour scenarios were presented, and the juvenile arrests were segregated between curfew hours and all other times according to the time of the incident which resulted in the arrest. Assistant City Attorney Ausman reported that the Curfew "A" scenario, which provides for a curfew from 10 PM to 6 AM, Sunday through Thursday and 11 PM to 6 AM Friday and Saturday, is similar to the curfew ordinance enacted in Dallas and which was recently upheld in the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Minutes ofthe Special Meeting ofthe Auburn City Council June 2,1997 Page 2 A comparison of curfew scenarios C, D. and E indicate that more incidents which give rise to an arrest occur between the hours of 11:00 PM and 12:00 midnight than 5:00 AM and 6:00 AM, Sunday through Saturday. Councilmember Brothers inquired whether a comparison has been made of the total number of adult arrests to juvenile arrests for the same time period. Assistant City Attorney Ausman reported no comparison was made. Chief Purdy advised there were over 38,000 arrests in 1996. Councilmember Brothers noted juvenile incidents occur at the average rate of approximately 50 per month. Assistant City Attorney Ausman reviewed the charts identifying the number of juvenile arrests by age and the number of juvenile felony arrests for 1995 and the first ten months of 1996. Councilmember Brothers questioned whether any statistics exist which show the potential number of citations for curfew violations if a curfew had been in place. Chief Purdy responded that no statistics exist. Assistant City Attorney Ausman noted that the draft curfew ordinance is a civil ordinance and a curfew violation would be a civil infraction. She quoted some statistics on the type of felony arrests which occurred in 1995 and 1996. 1995 1996 (Jan-Oc0 Assault (1, 2,' and 3) 23 14 Possession of Stolen Property 37 13 Malicious Mischief (B & C) 18 2 Councilmember Brothers questioned whether any statistics exist which reflect the number of juveniles who are victimized on the streets during the same time periods. Assistant City Attorney Ausman responded that data on the number of juvenile victims was. not compiled. III. LegalIssues Assistant City Attorney Ausman distributed copies of the draft curfew ordinance for discussion and copies of R.C.W. 35.21.635 which provides authority for implementation of a curfew ordinance. City Attorney Reynolds distributed copies of the Court of Appeals, Division One decision issued today regarding the Bellingham curfew Ordinance. Minutes ofthe Special Meeting ofthe Auburn City Council June 2,1997 Page 3 Assistant City Attorney Ausman noted that the draft ordinance contains several findings. If the Council determines to pursue the enactment of a curfew ordinance, a public hearing would be held at which time public testimony and information can be presented. The City Council would make findings based upon the public testimony and information received at the hearing. IV. Enforcement Issues See Item V., Draft Ordinance, for discussion of enforcement issues. V. Draft Ordinance Assistant City Attorney Ausman explained the draft ordinance is substantially based upon the Dallas and Tacoma curfew ordinances. She reviewed the draft ordinance section by section' beginning with definitions in Section 9.50.070 on page 8. She noted the following terms require further defining by the Council: Curfew Hours, Guardian, and Juvenile. She reported the City of Tacoma defines a juvenile as any unemancipated minor under the age of 18 and the City of Dallas defines a juvenile as any unemancipated minor under the age of 17. Section 9.50.020 of the ordinance describes curfew offenses. A minor commits an offense if he or she remains in any public place or on the premises of any establishment within the City during curfew hours. A parent or guardian commits an offense if he or she knowingly permits or by insufficient control allows the juvenile to be out or the parent or guardian fails to appear to take the juvenile into custody after contact with the police department. An offense also occurs if the owner or operator of an establishment encourages or affirmatively facilitates a violation by a juvenile or knowingly allows a minor to remain upon the premises of the establishment during curfew hours. Section 9.50.030 of the draft ordinance includes ten (10) defenses for the juvenile. The defenses for the juvenile include: 1. accompanied by-choice of language: "the juvenile's parent, guardian, or extended family member who is not also a minor", or "accompanied by the juvenile's parent, legal guardian or other responsible person who is __ years of age or older" and approved by the juvenile's parent, guardian, custodian or other adult person having custody or control of the juvenile to accompany said juvenile; or Minutes of the Special Meeting of the Auburn City Council June Z, 1997 Page 4 2. on an errand at the direction of the juvenile's parent or guardian, or other adult person having custody or control of the juvenile without any unnecessary detour or stop, or 3. in a motor vehicle involved in interstate travel with the consent of a parent, guardian, custodial or other adult person having custody or control of the juvenile through the state of Washington; or 4. engaged in a legal employment activity, or going to or returning home from a legal employment activity without any unnecessary detour or stop; or 5. involved in an emergency, or 6. on the sidewalk abutting the juvenile's residence or abutting the residence of a next-door neighbor, if the neighbor did not complain to the police department; or 7. attending, going to, or returning home without any detour or unnecessary stop, from an official school, religious or other activity supervised by adults or sponsored by any of the following: the City of Auburn, a civic organization, the BOys and Girls Clubs, the YVVCA, the YMCA, King County, or other similar entity which takes responsibility for the juvenile, or a place of entertainment, such as a movie, play or sporting event; or Councilmember Wagner expressed concern that the provision "other similar entity which takes responsibility for the juvenile" is too broad and suggested it be changed to read "other similar entity which takes responsibility for supervision of the juvenile". 8. exercising First Amendment rights protected by the United States Constitution, such as the free exercise of religion, freedom of speech, and the right of assembly; or 9. married and, thus, has achieved the age of majority, or has become emancipated; or 10. engaged in lawful commercial activity which was commenced prior to curfew hours and the juvenile proceeds directly home, without any detour or unnecessary stop, upon termination of the commercial activity. Minutes ofthe Special Meeting ofthe Auburn City Council June 2,1997 Page 5 A parent defense is provided in cases where the parent or guardian is reasonably hindered that he or she is unable to appear and take custody of the juvenile when requested to do so. A defense is also provided for the person or operator of the establishment if they have notified the police department that the juveniles are present and have refused to leave. There was discussion among members of the City Council regarding the curfew offense by a person or operator of an establishment and the defense for a person' or operator of an establishment. It was suggested that paragraph "D" under Offenses be changed to read: "A person or operator, as defined herein, commits an offense if that person or operator encourages, or affirmatively facilitates a violation of this ordinance by a juvenile or knowingly allows a minor to remain upon the promises of the ostablishmont during c, urfow hours." The ordinance's enforcement section, contained in Section 9.50.040 of the draft ordinance, requires the police officer to issue a citation only if the officer reasonably believes an offense has occurred and no defense is present. The ordinance contains a temporary custody procedure under Section 9.50.050. The temporary custody procedure provides the options for where the juvenile curfew offender will be taken after being taken into custody by the police department. Assistant City Attorney Ausman noted that the temporary custody options for when a juvenile cannot be released to a parent, guardian, custodian, or an extended family member have not been identified yet. Possible alternatives may be that the juvenile shall remain at the police department until the parent appears to take responsibility for the juvenile or referred to an appropriate facility of the Department of Social and Health Services. The City of Tacoma provides that juveniles may be taken to the police department or fire stations. Section 9.50.060 of the ordinance addresses violations and penalties. A violation of the curfew ordinance is considered a civil infraction and is subject to a fine in an amount to be determined by the Council. Community service hours may be required in lieu of a monetary fine. City Attorney Ausman advised that one sample city ordinance provides that the first infraction shall be a warning only. Suggestions. for the amount of court costs to be assessed with each violation are pending further discussions with the judge, Personnel Director Kennedy, and other jurisdictions. Minutes of the Special Meeting of the Auburn City Council June 2, 1997 Page 6 Councilmember Brothers questioned potential city liability for delivering custody of a juvenile to an unsafe guardian or custodian. Assistant City Attorney Ausman responded that there is always a question of liability in particular circumstances. She advised that she is unaware of any problems with other jurisdictions' enforcement of curfew ordinances other than the City of Bellingham. Councilmember Singer suggested contracting with Auburn Youth Resources as an alternate temporary custody facility for curfew offenders and charge the expense back to the parents. Assistant City Attorney Ausman agreed to investigate the suggestion. Councilmember Wagner reported he learned from Mayor Rants of Tukwila that the City of Tukwila has approximately three juvenile cases per year where the juvenile cannot be returned to a parent or guardian. In response to a question from Councilmember Brothers, Assistant City Attorney Ausman explained that the draft ordinance presented this evening is patterned substantially from the cities of Tacoma and Dallas ordinances. However, the violations section of the ordinance is patterned after the City of Bellingham ordinance. Section 9.50.070 addresses third party liability. This section provides that the City, in passing the ordinance, does not guarantee that enforcement will be 100 percent and leaves discretion to law enforcement in enforcing the ordinance. In reviewing the language of Section 9.50.070, Councilmember Brothers questioned whether the intent of the ordinance is to protect the juveniles from harm or punish juveniles. Assistant City Attorney Ausman explained that the Council will need to determine its goals and objectives for implementing a curfew ordinance. Section 9.50.080 of the draft ordinance provides evaluation of the effectiveness of the ordinance. VI. Discussion Councilmember Borden inquired whether the City has statistics on children as victims of crime. Assistant City Attorney Ausman and Chief Purdy explained that the existing record system does not provide easy access to the data, and each case would need to be read and the data manually extracted. Minutes of the Special Meeting of the Auburn City Council June 2, 1997 Page 7 In response to a question from Councilmember Singer, Assistant City Attorney Ausman agreed that the City needs to determine there is a compelling need for the curfew ordinance. Generally, courts have determined that government entities have an interest in the well-being of their youth as well as the well-being of the general public. The ordinance should provide the least restrictive means for accomplishing the goal. Assistant City Attorney Ausman advised that federal courts have upheld a curfew ordinance, and that she will need to review the recent Court of Appeals decision with regard to the Bellingham curfew ordinance. There are approximately 30 curfew ordinances in effect in the state of Washington at this time, and Ms Ausman is unaware of any other court challenges at this time. City Attorney Reynolds encouraged the Council to review the Court of Appeals Division 1 decision. VII. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 6:45 p.m. Approved on the/~ ~ day of . ,1997. Charles A. Booth, Mayor Robin Wohlhueter, City Clerk g7M6-02A. DOC ARRESTS ARISING FROM INCIDENTS DURING PROPOSED CURFEW HOURS 1 995 (Jan-Dec) 1996 (Jan-Oct) 612 Juv. Arrests 500 Juv. Arrests % of Total % of Total Day(s) Time(s) Juv, Arrests Juv, Arrests Juv, Arrests Juv, Arrests CURFEW Sun.-Th. 10PM-6AM 132 22% 75 15% A Fri.-Sat. 11PM-6AM 45 7% 30 6% CURFEW A totals 177 29% 105 21% NON-CURFEW (all other times) 435 ~ 71% 395 ~ 79% CURFEW Sun.-Th. 10PM-5AM 122 20% 73 15% B Fri.-Sat. 11PM-5AM 44 7% 30 6% CURFEW B totals 166 27% 103 21% NON-CURFEW (all other times) 446 I 73% 397 I 79% Sun.~Sat. 12AM-6AM '130 21% 65 13% CURFEW C NON- Sun.-Sat. 6AM-12AM 482 79% 435 87% CURFEW Sun..-Sat 11PM-6AM 166 27% 97 19% CURFEW D NON- Sun.-Sat. 6AM-11PM 446 73% 403 81% CURFEW Sun.-Sat. 11PM-5AM 155 25% 95 19% CURFEW E NON- Sun.-Sat. 5AM-11PM 457 75% 405 81% CURFEW Preliminary Review for Discussion Purposes 6/2/97 NUMBER OF ARRESTS BY AGE 1995 (Jan-Dec) 1996 (Jan-Oct) 612 Juv. Arrests 500 Juv. Arrests % of Total % of Total Juv. Juv. Juv. Juv. Age Arrests Arrests Arrests Arrests <12 18 3% 36 7% 12 27 5% 33 7% 13 106 17% 55 11% 14 105 17% 76 15% 15 137 22% 90 18% 16 110 18% 121 24% ,. 17 109 18% 89 18% Total: 612 100% 500 100% NUMBER OF FELONY ARRESTS 1995 (Jan-Dec) 1996 (Jan-Oct) 612 Juv. Arrests 500 Juv. Arrests % of Total % of Total Juv. Juv. Juv. Juv. Arrests Arrests Arrests Arrests Felony 168 27% 98 20% Drug 11 2% 12 2% Preliminary Review for Discussion Purposes 6/2/97