There will be no rush to judgment on imposing a curfew for young people under the age of 18 in this city.
But there will, one way or another, be a decision.
“Do away with the ordinance, modify the ordinance or pass the ordinance,” Mayor Mitch Colvin was saying Monday night at a meeting of the Fayetteville City Council that drew more than 50 residents, with 30 of them opposed to a proposed youth protection ordinance in an effort to address recent juvenile crime.
Whatever the council’s decision, the mayor would assure, no decision will come without the council hearing from city residents, and that is a fair and prudent position on the part of the council.
Hence, a special council meeting is scheduled for 7 p.m. Monday for council members Kathy Keefe Jensen, Shakeyla Ingram, Mario Benavente, D.J. Haire, Johnny Dawkins, Derrick Thompson, Brenda McNair, Courtney Banks-McLaughlin, Deno Hondros and the mayor to discuss and debate the pros and cons of a youth curfew proposed on Sept. 5 by Police Chief Kemberle Braden and Fayetteville Police Department attorney Michael Whyte.
The curfew would prohibit adolescents under the age of 18 from being out in public from midnight to 5 a.m. on weekdays and 1 to 5 a.m. on weekends. For those under the age of 16, the curfew would be 11 p.m. to 6 a.m. Both proposals are similar to a county ordinance adopted in 2015. There are exceptions to the curfew hours, according to Braden and Whyte, for minors who are accompanied by a parent or legal guardian, minors coming and going from late-hour work, and in case of emergencies.
“We understand this is a tool,” Braden told the council on Sept. 5. “It’s not going to solve all the problems.”
But the majority of the council, with the exception of Mario Benavente and Deno Hondros, concurred with the chief that a curfew should be considered as a mitigation measure to address juvenile-involved crime referenced in Braden’s second-quarter city crime report on Aug. 28. Recent incidents include two juveniles charged with murder; eight juveniles charged with attempted murder; 25 juveniles charged with assault with serious injury; 94 juveniles charged with assault; 11 juveniles charged with shooting into occupied property; five juveniles charged with resisting a government official; 11 juveniles with speeding violations to elude arrest; 94 juveniles charged with drug violations; and 54 juveniles charged with weapons violations.
The chief noted, too, that nine juveniles were arrested in a recent rash of motor vehicle break-ins.
Two sides to the curfew
There are pros and cons concerning a juvenile curfew.
“I am not sure what the right way to voice my approval for a curfew is, but honestly, if my child were wandering the streets after midnight,” David Runkle says in an email, “I would want to know, because it clearly would not have been with my permission. My children are grown and gone, but I work with young teenage boys through Scouts all the time and have for 36 years. Even when we are camping, our Scouts are not allowed to roam after 11 p.m. It is our responsibility as leaders to hold them accountable, and it is a parent’s responsibility to hold children accountable.
“Teenagers should not be working after 11 p.m., either. I am sure there are situations I would not quite understand, but employers should not hire teenagers for shifts that begin or end after 11 p.m. While this won’t solve every problem, it would certainly be a good start.
“I would hope any law enforcement officer who observed a person that looked that young wandering alone or with a group would engage quickly and safely,” Runkle says. “We need to do something to reduce the number of those types of incidents. This would be a good start.”
Gerard Falls is a city resident and sees a curfew differently.
“I read your editorial in CityView regarding the euphemistically titled ‘youth protection ordinance,’” Falls wrote in an email prior to Monday’s council meeting, referencing a Sept. 10 column. “By now, you’ve undoubtedly read the myriad expert and well-respected opinions from folks across the community regarding the well-established inefficacy of curfew programs, the biased ways in which they are enforced, the ways in which these curfews lead to the criminalization of young people and the potential legal liabilities that could impact the city when 19- and 20-year-olds are asked to produce an ID in a state that does not permit stop-and-identify. If not, I’ll refer you to the following editorials by Myron Pitts, Rob Taber and Troy Williams.”
Falls raises other points, too.
“At no point in your article is the police data on youth crime connected to any hour of the day that would indicate that a curfew would have even been a relevant factor,” he writes. “Additionally, this curfew is also in effect from 7:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. (school hours), meaning that it would impact home-schooled teenagers, high school students with partial schedules, and students on their way to and from school who could be subject to a police interaction at an officer’s discretion.
“Finally, while I understand that emotional appeals can carry some weight in lieu of an evidence- and expertise-based argument, I find the appeals to specific families’ very real tragedies both cynical and offensive. Council member Courtney Banks-McLaughlin’s daughter was killed in a private residence in the evening before any curfew would have taken effect by a fellow teenager with an unsecured handgun. It’s certainly a case that calls for stricter gun control and accountability for gun owners, but it is irrelevant to the ordinance debate at hand. And there is no detail whatsoever provided in the Robeson County robbery and standoff that directly supports the notion that a curfew could have prevented or had any impact whatsoever on that crime.”
Clearly, there are those with differing opinions about the efficacy of this proposed juvenile curfew, although, Mr. Falls, you may wish to consider that it was Councilwoman Banks-McLaughlin who brought up the shooting death of her 15-year-old daughter at the City Council work session on Sept. 5, and it was Demetria Murphy who reminded us that a 15-year-old involved in the Robeson County convenience store standoff is one of two juveniles charged in the 1:30 a.m. July 17 shooting death of 19-year-old Danielle Claire Golcher at a Bragg Boulevard gas station. Had there been a curfew, perhaps Danielle Claire Golcher might be alive today. And I don’t recall the police chief talking about a curfew from 7:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
‘Ordinance is not perfect,’ but …
That said, City Manager Douglas Hewett would tell the council Monday night that he believes juvenile crime is “worthwhile” to address. I agree with the city manager and I am not alone.
“It moved probably a lot faster than some of us would have thought,” Hewett would say. “Citizens have asked the council and continue to ask the council. ‘What are you going to do about crime in the community? What are you going to do to make sure that children are protected and the children are safe?’ This ordinance is not perfect,” but … “ I support it and I think that it will have some benefit. … If ultimately the council decides not to adopt it for a variety of reasons, I think that the conversation itself is worthwhile.”
Many of us, too, agree with Councilmen Benavente and Hondros that the proposed curfew needs input from others to include the Cumberland County Department of Social Services and the state’s juvenile justice system.
Epilogue
The mayor and the council will discuss the pros and cons of the proposed curfew Monday in City Hall.
“We want to spend the time and do the work and work through questions that you’ve posed and others have posed,” Mitch Colvin would say, and the proposed curfew will be the only item for discussion at the special City Council meeting. “We get a lot of questions, we get a lot of concerns from the community all the time about what we plan to do about the issue of violence in the community. The question should be, ‘What do we all plan to do and how do we play a role?’ This is a community problem that we have to address as a community.”
Later, the mayor says, a public forum will be scheduled and your voice can be heard.
Bill Kirby Jr. can be reached at billkirby49@gmail.com or 910-624-1961 .
