PS ITEM 1
December 1, 2011
Worksession 3
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
Public Safety Committee
_~Amanda
Mihill, Legislative
Attorne~
~'Michael
Faden, Senior Legislative Attorney
Robert Drummer, Senior Legislative Attorney
I
/5J"
,
SUBJECT:
Worksession 3:
Expedited Bill 25-11, Offenses - Curfew
Established
Expedited Bill 25-11, Offenses - Curfew - Established, sponsored by the Council President at the
request of the County Executive, was introduced on July 12,2011. A public hearing was held on
, July 26, at which speakers articulated strong positions for and against this Bill. See select
testimony and correspondence on ©23-33. The Public Safety Committee held worksessions on
Bill 25-11 on September 15 and November 3.
Council staff packets for those worksessions
provide a summary of background issues and information. Councilmembers should bring
their packets from those worksessions to this meeting.
Additional background information
attached to this memorandum include information provided to this Committee for its October 6
update on implementation of Police Department's 3rd District staffing (©20) and information
provided to the Public Safety and Health and Human Services Committees for their October 13
session on positive youth programming in Montgomery County (©13).
Bill 25-11 would establish a curfew for minors, prohibit certain activities during the curfew, allow
certain defenses, and specify enforcement procedures and penalties. According to the County
Executive's transmittal memorandwn, Bill 25-11 is intended to address issues relating to increased
gang activity, violence, and crime involving minors in the County. The Executive noted that Bill
25-11 is similar to current laws in Prince George's County and the District of Colwnbia.
Summary of Introduced Bill
As introduced, Bill 25-11 would establish a curfew for minors between 11 p.m. and 5 a.m. on
Sunday through Thursday and from 12:0
I
a.m. until 5 a.m. on Saturday and Sunday. During the
curfew hours, a minor must not
remain
in any County public place or establishment. Executive
staff confirmed that a minor could be cited for a curfew violation only after a police officer has told
the minor to move along and the minor refused. "Public place" is defmed as "a place to which the
public, or a substantial group of the public, has access". "Establishment" is defined as "any
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
privately-owned place of business to which the public is invited, including any place of amusement
or entertainment". Bill 25-11 would also prohibit a minor's parent from knowingly (or by
insufficient control) permitting a minor to remain in any public place or establishment during
curfew hours and prohibit the owner or operator of an establishment from knowingly allowing a
minor to remain at an establishment during curfew hours.
Bill 25-11 lists many situations in which a minor may lawfully remain during curfew hours. These
exceptions are if the minor is:
1)
accompanied by the minor's parent;
2)
accompanied by an adult authorized by the minor's parent to accompany the minor
for a specified period of time and purpose in a specified area;
3)
on an errand at the direction of the minor's parent, without any detour or stop, until
12:30 a.m.;
4)
in a motor vehicle, train, or bus in interstate travel through the County or starting or
ending in the County;
5)
engaged in employment, or going to, or returning home from, employment, without
any detour or stop. The minor must carry a valid work permit issued under State
law;
6)
responding to an emergency;
7)
on the property where the minor resides;
8)
on the sidewalk that abuts the minor's residence, or that abuts the residence of a
next-door neighbor if the neighbor did not complain to the Police Department about
the minor's presence;
9)
attending an official school, religious, or other recreational activity sponsored by the
County, a civic organization, or a similar entity that takes responsibility for the
minor, or going to, or returning home from, without any detour or stop, an official
school, religious, or other recreational activity supervised by adults and sponsored
by the County, a civic organization, or a similar entity that takes responsibility for
the minor; or
10)
exercising First Amendment rights protected by the U. S. Constitution.
Additionally, an owner or operator would not be in violation of the law if the owner or operator
notified the Police Department that a minor was in the establishment during curfew hours and
refused to leave.
Bill 25-11 also specifies enforcement procedures and penalties. Under the bill, after asking an
apparent offender's age, if a police officer finds that a minor is committing a curfew violation, the
police officer must take the minor to the nearest police facility and detain the minor until the minor
can be released into a parent's custody. If no parent is available, the police can take the minor to the
minor's residence or place the minor in custody of the Department of Health and Human Services
(DHHS), who may release the minor at the end of curfew hours.
Violation of Bill 25-11 would be a Class A violation for a parent or owner/operator of an
establishment. A civil Class A violation would carry a $500 fine for a first offense and a $750 fine
for a repeat offense. A criminal Class A violation would carry a maximum fine of $1,000 and a
6-month maximum jail term. Bill 25-11 as introduced would also allow the Court to require a
2
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
parent who violates the law to complete parenting classes. A minor who violates the curfew may be
required to perform up to 25 hours of community service.
Executive Amendments
On August 31, the County Executive submitted proposed amendments to Bill 25-11 (see redraft on
© 1-8).
Council staff suggests that this redraft be treated substantively as the Bill before the
Committee, subject to further technical polishing.
The following Executive amendments are of
particular note:
Enforcement procedures/penalties.
The penalties for violating Bill 25-11 as introduced are
detailed on page 2. The Executive's proposed amendments would make a violation of Bill 25-11 a
Class B civil citation for any minor, parent, or owner/operator (©7, lines 156-157; ©8, lines
170-174). The maximum fine for a Class B violation is $100 for an initial offense and $150 for a
repeat offense.
In
his amendments memo, the Executive noted that the State's Attorney believes
that if arrest authority is required in a specific situation, a police officer can use existing authority in
state law requiring individuals to obey lawful police orders. A representative of the State's Attorney
is expected to attend this worksession.
In addition, the Executive's amendments would delete the authority for a Court to require a parent
to complete parenting classes and order a minor to perform community service (©8, lines 175-180).
The County Attorney's office concluded that the County does not have the authority to empower
courts to impose these requirements.
Finally, the Executive's amendments would delete language authorizing the police to take an
offending minor to a police facility and allowing the police to release the minor into the custody of
DHHS (©7-8, lines 151-168).
Exceptions.
The Executive recommended several amendments to the exceptions to the curfew. As
we noted on page 2, the bill includes a list of situations where a minor would not be found in
violation of the curfew. The State's Attorney recommended that the bill be amended to clarify that
these are affirmative defenses; Council staff is not sure that this change in terminology makes any
legal difference, but it is more confusing to the non-lawyer. Therefore, Council staff suggests
language changes for readability (see ©5, lines 100-109; ©7, lines 137-139). The Executive also
recommended that this list of exceptions include a minor who is attending or returning home from
"an event at a place of public entertainment" (©6-7, lines 134-136). The Executive also
recommended that the exception related to employment be amended to not require the minor to
carry a work permit (©6, lines 112-114).
Other amendments.
The Executive's proposed amendments would also:
• alter the [mdings and purpose clauses to reflect the purpose of reducing juvenile violence,
gang activity, and crime (and removing language indicating there has been an increase in
these activities) and preventing disturbances of the public peace (©2, lines 4,21-22);
• amend the definition of "emergency" (©3, lines 39-41);
3
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
• delete the phrase "insufficient control" from the prohibitions related to a parent, therefore
narrowing the circumstances under which a parent could be found in violation of Bill 25-11
(©4, lines 79-80); and
• delete the definition of knowingly because it is a legal term that is defined in case law (©5,
lines 83-89, 92-98).
Topics for Committee Discussion
The primary question for the Committee's consideration is whether a curfew is warranted and
would improve law enforcement and the quality of life in the County.
In
making this decision,
Committee members can evaluate the current crime and order situations in County urban areas,
the data provided by the Executive or elsewhere, effectiveness of curfews in other jurisdictions,
and any viable alternatives (for example, Bill 35-11 or increased funds for positive youth
development programs), along with fundamental policy questions about the role of government
in limiting personal conduct.
After discussing these central issues, if the Committee is inclined to recommend enactment of
some version of Bill 25-11, Committee members should review the following specific issues
I:
Enforcement
How do the Police intend to enforce the curfew? If enacted, will the curfew be
enforced uniformly against all minors in public places during curfew hours or will the Police
selectively enforce the curfew against only certain minors. The Executive's Frequently Asked
Questions states that Police would confront "teens called to their attention due to suspicious,
menacing, potentially violent, or violent behavior". The FAQ further states that Police would
respond to groups of young people that appear threatening or where trouble has started and that
Police would not stop people only because of their potential juvenile status. Would this type of
selective enforcement open the County to charges of arbitrary and/or discriminatory enforcement
that rendered certain loitering laws unconstitutional?
Executive authority
Councilmember Floreen indicated that she expects to offer an amendment
to convert the Bill's youth curfew authority to a conditional provision that only takes effect after
the County Executive has imposed a youth curfew, as needed to maintain public order, by
Executive order published in the County Register, after receiving the advice of the State's
Attorney, County Attorney, and Police Chief, for:
• the entire County or one or more designated areas of the County; and
• a specified time period.
Her amendment would also sunset the curfew law after 2 years (as of December 31, 2013). This
would assure a Council review of the need for and effectiveness of any curfew. Councilmember
Floreen's amendment is on ©12.
Locations
Should any curfew be limited to urban areas or Central Business Districts of the
County? While a case could be made for a curfew in, say, Silver Spring, the same factual case
Council staff also recommends 2 technical amendments to Bill 25-11:
(1)
language changes to the affirmative
defense section for readability (©5, lines 100-102 and ©7, lines 137-139); and (2) including examples of what First
Amendment rights are a defense to a potential curfew violation (©6, lines 131-132).
I
4
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
almost certainly cannot be made for Poolesville or Damascus, and possibly not even Bethesda.
Executive staff argue that misbehaving juveniles will move to uncovered areas if a curfew is
geographically limited. That is hardly clear on its face; in any case, if the curfew is
geographically limited and juvenile unrest spreads as Executive staff predict, the curfew's reach
could easily be extended as needed. The D.C. Circuit Court opinion in
Hutchins
concluded that
limiting the D.C. curfew to high-crime areas, as its opponents argued, would open the District to
"charges of racial discrimination". Council staff is not sure that would be the case here - at least
any more than the Executive's stated enforcement practices would open the County to such charges.
Age limit
Bill 25-11 would prohibit a minor - defined as anyone under 18, except a judicially
emancipated minor or a married minor from remaining in a public place or establishment
during the curfew hours. Tony Hausner and Safe Silver Spring urged the Council to lower the
age limit to minors under 17 (©23). The curfews in D.C. and Prince George's County apply to
minors under 17.
Hours
Bill 25-11 would set the curfew hours at 11 p.m. to 5 a.m. on Sunday through Thursday
and 12:01 a.m. to 5 a.m. on Saturday (e.g., Friday night) and Sunday (e.g., Saturday night), The
curfew hours in D. C. are 11 p.m. to 6 a.m. Sunday through Thursday and 12:01 a.m. - 6 a.m.
Saturday and Sunday. During July and August, the curfew hours are 12:01 a.m. to 6 a.m. every
day. The curfew hours in Prince George's County are 10 p.m. to 5 a.m. Sunday through
Thursday and 11 :59 p.m. to 5 a.m. Friday and Saturday. The Council received correspondence
from constituents urging that the curfew hours be based not on day of the week, but on whether
the following day is a school day. The Silver Spring Chamber of Commerce, while supporting
the curfew, urged the Council to set a later curfew hour during the summer months, similar to the
D.C. law (©25).
Exceptions
Bill 25-11 contains many exceptions (see pages 2 and 3), most of which are derived
from curfew laws elsewhere.
The First Amendment rights exception, while probably
constitutionally required, is quite broad; for example, it could be read to apply to a single teen­
ager because he or she is wearing a shirt saying "No curfews!" or another political or social
opinion.
Questions also have been raised about whether other exceptions are necessary. For instance, the
Council was asked whether the exceptions in the Executive's draft allow minors to take early
morning fishing trips without a parent or take a camping trip with a group of friends who are all
under the age of 18 (©26).
In addition, Jane Redicker, from the Greater Silver Spring Chamber of Commerce urged the
Council to add an exception for owner/operators of establishments such that they could not be
cited for employing minors after curfew hours. As proposed, Bill 25-11 prohibits an owner or
operator of an establishment from knowingly allowing a minor to remain at an establishment in
the County during curfew hours. There is an exception in the bill for minors who are engaged in
employment, or going to or returning home from employment, without any detour or stop, but
there is not an parallel exception for the employer. If the Committee supports this
recommendation, Council staff has drafted the following language to be inserted at ©7, lines
137-141:
5
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
ill
.li
is not
~
violation of subsection
Will
if
the owner or operator of
an establishment:
!A1
empl()ys a minor during curfew hours; or
all
promptly notified the Police Department that
~
minor was
present in the establishment during curfew hours and
refused to leave.
Teenage drivers and passengers
Action Committee for Transit (ACT) opposed Bill 25-11,
arguing that the curfew would be enforced against minors on foot or in public transit, but not in
cars (©28). ACT may be referring to the exception in Bill 25-11 for a minor "in a motor vehicle,
train, or bus in interstate travel through the County or starting or ending in the County".
An
interstate travel exception may be constitutionally required; Council staff would have to research
that further. In any case, state law prohibits provisional drivers license holders under 18 from
driving between midnight to 5 a.m., with certain exceptions.
2
Sunset
In its initial letter expressing concerns about Bill 25-11, the Greater Bethesda-Chevy
Chase Chamber of Commerce urged the Council to adopt a one year sunset for the curfew so that
its impact and need can be reviewed at a time certain (©29). Although the Chamber now
supports Bill 25-11, a 1- or 2-year sunset may be an appropriate way to assure that the curfew is
having the intended effect. As already mentioned, Councilmember Floreen's "Executive
authority" amendment includes a 2-year sunset provision.
This packet contains:
Revised Bill with Executive amendments
Executive revision memorandum
Councilmember Floreen amendment
Positive youth development information
3
rd
District Staffing update
Select testimony and correspondence
Safe Silver Spring
Greater Silver Spring Chamber of Commerce
Jerome Oden
Action Committee for Transit
Greater Bethesda-Chevy Chase Chamber of Commerce
Upcounty Citizens Advisory Board
Montgomery County Civic Federation
Circle
#
1
9
12
13
20
23
25
26
28
29
30
32
F:\LAw\BILLS\1125 Curfew\Public Safety Memo 12-I.Doc
2
See Md. Code, Transportation Article, § 16-113(d).
6
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Expedited Bill No. _---=2=5......;-1'-'1_ _ __
Concerning: Offenses -
Curfew -
Established
Revised: 11/28/2011
Draft No. 3
Introduced:
July 12, 2011
Expires:
January 12, 2013
Enacted: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Executive: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Effective: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Sunset Date: ....!N-'-'o=n=e_---:_ _ __
Ch. _ _, Laws of Mont. Co. _ __
COUNTY COUNCIL
FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MARYLAND
By: Council President at the Request ofthe County Executive
AN EXPEDITED ACT
to:
(1)
establish a curfew for minors;
(2)
make certain findings;
(3)
prohibit certain activities during the curfew;
(4)
provide for certain defenses;
(5)
establish enforcement procedures and penalties; and
(6)
generally amend County law relating to offenses and curfews.
By adding
Montgomery County Code
Chapter 32, Offenses - Victim Advocate
Section 32-23A
Boldface
Underlining
[Single boldface brackets]
Double underlining
[[Double boldface brackets]]
* * *
Heading or defined term.
Added to existing law
by
original
bill.
Deletedfrom existing law
by
original bill.
Added
by
amendment.
Deletedfrom existing law or the bill
by
amendment.
Existing law unaffected
by bill.
The County Council for Montgomery County, Maryland approves the following Act:
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
EXPEDITED BILL
No. 25-11
1
Sec
1.
Sections 32-23A is added as follows:
32-23A. Curfew.
2
3
4
5
6
ill
Findings and Purpose.
ill
[[There has been an increase in]] A curfew for minors will help
reduce juvenile violence, juvenile
minors in the County.
.@!lg
activity, and crime
Qy
7
8
ill
Minors are particularly susceptible, because of their lack of
maturity and experience, to participate in unlawful and gang­
related activities and to be the victims of crime.
9
10
11
12
ill
The County [[is obligated to]]
fA}
provide for:
the protection of minors from each other and from other
persons;
13
14
15
16
au
(Q)
the
enforcement
of parental
control
over,
and
responsibility for, children;
the protection of the general public; and
the reduction of the incidence of juvenile criminal
activities.
(±)
A curfew for minors is in the interest of the public health,
@
17
18
19
safety, and general welfare and will help to attain these
objectives and to diminish the impact of unwanted conduct on
County residents. including the prevention of disturbances to
the public peace.
20
21
22
23
24
ill
A curfew law will protect the welfare of minors by:
fA}
reducing the likelihood that minors will be the victims of
criminal acts during the curfew hours;
25
26
27
au
reducing the likelihood that minors will become involved
in criminal acts or exposed to trafficking in controlled
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
EXPEDITED BILL
No.
25-11
28
substances during the curfew hours; and
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
.e.g
care.
(hl
aiding parents in carrying out their responsibility to
exerCIse reasonable supervision of minors entrusted to their
Definitions.
In this Section, the following terms have the meanings indicated:
Curfew hours
means from
11.
p.m. on any Sunday, Monday, Tuesday,
~
Wednesday, or Thursday, until
a.m. the following day, and from
12:01 a.m. until
~
a.m. on any Saturday or Sunday.
Drug trafficking
means the act of engaging in any prohibited activity
38
39
40
related to controlled dangerous substances as defined in State law.
Emergency
means [[an unforeseen combination of circumstances or
the resulting state that calls for immediate action.
includes]]
~
Emergency
41
42
43
44
45
46
fire, natural disaster, automobile accident, or any situation
that requires immediate action to prevent serious bodily injury or loss
of life.
Establishment
means any privately-owned place of business to which
the public is invited, including any place of amusement or
entertainment.
Minor
means any person under
~
47
48
years old, but does not include
~
judicially emancipated minor or
~
married minor.
Operator
means any individual, firm, association, partnership, or
49
50
corporation that operates, manages, or conducts an establishment.
Operator
includes the members or partners of an association or
51
52
53
54
partnership and the officers of
~
corporation.
Parent
means:
ill
natural parent;
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
EXPEDITED BILL
No.
25-11
55
56
57
ill
ill
ill
ill
adoptive parent;
step-parent;
any person who has legal custody or is the guardian of
~
minor
Qy
court order or marriage;
58
59
60
61
any person who is at least 21 years old who is authorized
Qy
~
natural parent, adoptive parent, step-parent, or custodial parent
of
f!
child to act as
f!
caretaker for the child; or
62
63
64
®
f!
public or private agency with whom
f!
minor has been placed
Qy~
court.
Public place
means any place to which the public, or
f!
substantial
group of the public, has access.
Public place
includes any street,
highway, and common area of
f!
school, hospital, apartment house,
office building, transport facility, or shop.
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
Remain
means to linger, stay, or fail to leave
f!
public place· or
establishment when requested to do so
Qy
~
police officer or the
owner, operator, or other person in control of the public place or
establishment.
Serious bodilv injury
means bodily injury that creates
f!
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.
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
W
Prohibitions.
ill
ill
Minor.
A minor must not remain in any public place or
establishment in the County during curfew hours.
Parent.
A parent of
f!
minor must not knowingly [[permit, or
Qy
insufficient control]] allow, the minor to remain in any
80
81
public place or any establishment in the County during curfew
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
EXPEDITED BILL
No. 25-11
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
hours.
[[The term "knowingly" includes knowledge that
~
parent should reasonably be expected to have concerning the
location of .f! minor in that parent's legal custody.
This
requirement is intended to hold .f! neglectful or careless parent to
.f! reasonable community standard of parental responsibility
through an objective test.
It
~
therefore, no defense that .f!
parent did not know of the activities, conduct, or location of the
minor.]]
90
91
ill
Owner or Operator.
The owner or operator of an
~
establishment must not knowingly allow
minor to remain at
[[The
92
93
94
95
an establishment in the County during curfew hours.
term "knowingly" includes knowledge that an owner or
operator should reasonably be expected to have concerning the
patrons of the establishment. The standard for "knowingly"
must be whether .f! reasonable person in the position of the
owner or operator should have known that the patron was .f!
minor committing
~
curfew violation.]]
@
[[Affirmative]] Defenses.
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
ill
It
is [[not]] [[anaffirmative defense to]] not .f! violation of this
Section if .f! minor shows that during curfew hours the minor
was:
®
ill)
accompanied
Qy
the minor's parent;
accompanied
Qy
an adult authorized
Qy
the minor's
parent to accompany the minor for
~
specified period of
time and purpose in.f! specified area;
(g
on an errand at the direction of the minor's parent,
without any detour or stop, until 12:30 a.m.;
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
EXPEDITED BILL No.
25-11
109
(D) in
~
motor vehicle, train, or bus in interstate travel
110
111
112
113
through the County or starting or ending in the County;
®
engaged in employment, or going
~
or returning home
from, employment, without any detour or stop. [[The
minor must
£IDIY
~
valid work permit issued under State
law]];
(E)
(ill
114
115
responding to an emergency;
on the property where the minor resides;
116
117
118
(H) on the sidewalk that abuts the minor's residence, or that
abuts the residence of
~
next-door neighbor if the
119
120
121
122
123
neighbor did not complain to the Police Department
about the minor's presence;
ill
attending or returning home from. without any detour,
an official school, religious, or [[other]] recreational
activity sponsored
Qy
the County,
~
civic organization,
124
125
126
127
128
129
or
~
similar entity that takes responsibility for the minor
at the event
[[!l.
or going
~
or returning home from,
without any detour or stop, an official school, religious,
or other recreational activity supervised
Qy
adults and
sponsored
Qy
the County,
~
civic organization, or
~
similar entity that takes responsibility for the minor; or]]
130
131
132
133
134
135
ill
exercising First Amendment rights protected
Qy
the
United States Constitution. including free exercise of
religion. freedom of speech, and the right of assembly
[[J]m:.;.
(K) attending or returning home from, without any
d~tour,
an event at a place of public entertainmen;bincluding a
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
EXPEDITED BILL
No.
25-11
136
137
138
movie. concert. play, or sporting event.
ill
It
is [[not]] [[an affirmative
def~nse
to]] not
£!
violation of
subsection (c)(3) if the owner or operator of an establishment
shows that the 0W'ner or operator promptly notified the Police
Department that
£!
minor was present in the establishment
during curfew hours and refused to leave.
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
W
Enforcement procedures.
ill
Before taking any enforcement action under this Section,
£!
police officer must ask an apparent minor's age and reason for
being in the public place or establishment. The officer must not
issue
£!
citation [[or make an arrest]] under this Section unless
the officer reasonably believes that:
(A}
an offense has occurred; and
based on any response and other circumstances, no
condition in subsection
@
applies.
an
ill
If
£!
police officer finds that
£!
minor is committing
£!
curfew
offense, the police officer [[must take the minor to the nearest
available Police facility, substation, or other area designated
Qy
the Police Department, and detain the minor until the minor can
be released to the custody of the minor's parent or an adult
acting in loco parentis]]
~issue
a civil citation and order the
minor to go home promptly.
[[ill
The minor's parent or an adult acting in loco parentis with
respect to the minor must be called to the Police facility,
substation or other designated area to take custody of the minor.
A minor who is released to
f!
person acting in loco parentis with
respect to the minor must not be taken into custody for violation
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
EXPEDITED BILL
No.
25-11
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
of this Section while returning home with the person acting in
loco parentis. If no person claims responsibility for the minor,
the police may take the minor to the minor's residence or place
the minor in the custody of the Department of Health and
Human Services, who may release the minor at
~
a.m. the next
morning.]]
ill
Penalties.
ill
Any mIllor, parent.. or any owner or operator of an
establishment who violates this Section has committed
£!
separate offense for each day, or part of
£!
day, during which the
violation is committed, continued, or permitted. Each offense
is
£!
Class
[[A]]
B violation.
[[ill
The Court may also require one or more parent of
£!
minor, after
each conviction for violating this Section to complete parenting
classes.
ill
A minor found to have violated this Section
Qy
the Juvenile
Court may be ordered to perform
!!Q
to 25 hours of community
service for each violation.]]
Sec 2. Expedited Effective Date.
The Council declares that this Act is necessary for the immediate protection
of the public interest. This Act takes effect on the date when it becomes law.
Approved:
185
Valerie Ervin, President, County Council
Date
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE
ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND 20850
lsiah Leggett
County Executive
August 31,2011
TO:
Valerie Ervin
Council President
FROM:
Isjah Leggett
County Executive
-=A'.
~.
.,.-"_ _
SUBJECT:
Recommended amendments to Bill 25-11) Offenses - Curfew - Established
I want to thank the Council for introducing Bill 25-11, Offenses Curfew ­
Established on my behalf on July 12 and promptly holding a public hearing on the bill on July
26. Based on testimony provided at the public hearing and feedback I have received from the
State's Attorney and other County residents, I would like to recommend a number of
amendments to clarify the intent of the bill and the manner in which it would be implemented. I
am attaching an amended version of the bill that reflects all of my recommended amendments.
Each of the amendments is discussed in more detail below.
Legislative Intent
I recommend that language be added to clarify that the intent of the bill is to
reduce juvenile violence, juvenile gang activity, and juvenile crime in the County and prevent
disturbances ofthe public peace, in addition to protecting minors from each other and other
persons and enforcing parental responsibility for children (see lines 4 and 21-22).
Civil Citation
The bill currently specifies that a curfew violation is a Class A violation but does
not specify whether the violation is criminal or civil. This is similar to other existing County
Code provisions relating to certain types ofoffenses, which can be enforced either criminally or
civilly. However, based on advice from the State's Attorney, I recommend that the bill be
amended to make a curfew violation a Class B civil offense that is punishable by a maximum
fine of $100 for a first offense and $150 for a second offense (see lines 138-170). If arrest
authority is needed in a situation involving a curfew violation, the State's Attorney believes that
a police officer could use existing authority granted under §10-201(c)(3) of the Criminal Law
Article to arrest an individual who disobeys an order made by a police officer to prevent a
disturbance of the public peace.
~~~~,"r~~~f"~ll't
montgomerycountymd.gov/311 '
240-773-3556 TTV
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Valerie Ervin, Council President
August 31, 2011
Page 2
Penalties
I recommend that the bill be amended to delete language that allows a court to
require a parent of a minor who violates the curfew law to complete parenting classes and to
order a minor to perform up to 25 hours of community services (see lines 171-176), According
to the County Attorney's office, the County does not have authority under State law to authorize
courts to impose these types of requirements. However, courts already have authority under
State law to impose them in some circumstances (e.g., as conditions of probation before
judgment).
Emergency
Under the bill, a minor may not be cited for a curfew violation ifthe minor is
responding to an emergency. I recommend that the definition of "emergency" be clarified by
deleting language that could be construed to make the definition internally inconsistent (see lines
39-41).
Parental Responsibility
The bill prohibits a parent from "knowingly" or "by insufficient control" allowing
a minor to remain in any public place or establishment during curfew hours. Based on advice
from the State's Attorney, I recommend deleting the reference to "insufficient control" because it
is too vague (see lines
79-80).
Definition of
'~Knowlngly"
Based on advice from the State's Attorney, I recommend deleting the definition of
"knowingly" from the bill because this is a legal term of
art
that is defined in case law and does
not need to be defined in the County Code (see lines 83-89 and lines 92-98).
Affirmative Defenses
The bill includes a broad list of circmnstances under which a minor may be in a
public place or establishment during curfew hours, including situations when a minor is:
(1) accompanied by a parent;
(2) accompanied by an adult authorized by the minor's parent to
accompany the minor;
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Valerie Ervin, Council President
August 31, 2011
Page 3
(3) on an errand at the direction of the minor's parent without any detour
or stop, lllltil 12:30 a.m.;
(4) in a motor vehicle, train, or bus in interstate travel through the County
or starting or ending in the County;
(5) engaging in employment, or going to, or returning home from
employment, without any detour or stop (while carrying a valid work
permit issued under State law);
(6) responding to an emergency;
(7) on the property where the minor resides;
(8) on a sidewalk that abuts the minor's residence or the residence of a
next-door neighbor ifthe neighbor did not complain to the Police
Department about the minor's presence;
(9) going to, attending, or returning horne from an official school,
religious, or recreational activity sponsored by the COllllty, a civic
organization, or a similar entity that takes responsibility for the minor at
the event; or
(10) exercising First Amendment rights protected by the United States
Constitution.
Based on advice from the State's Attorney, I recommend that the bill be amended
to clarify that all of the circumstances in this list constitute affirmative defenses to a curfew
violation (see lines 100 and 134). I also recommend that this list be expanded to include a minor
who is attending or returning home from, without any detour, an event at a place of public
entertainment, including a movie, concert, play, or sporting event (see lines 131-133). Finally, I
recommend that the requirement to carry a valid work permit referenced in item (5) above be
deleted as unnecessarily restrictive because possession of a work permit is only one way for a
police officer to confirm that a minor is involved in a work related activity (see lines 111-113).
Thank you for your consideration of these recommended amendments.
c:
Tom Manger, Police Chief
John McCarthy, State's Attorney
Marc Hansen, County Attorney
Kathleen Boucher, ACAO
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
AMENDMENT
To Bill 25-11
BY COUNCILMEMBER FLOREEN
PURPOSE: To authorize the County Executive to impose a youth curfew as necessary to
maintain public order, and to sunset that authority in 2 years.
On page
4
of the Executive redraft, after line
75,
insert subsection (c) and reletter later
subsections:
W
Executive Order. To impose a curfew under this Section. the County Executive
must:
ill
find. after
rec~iving
the advice of the Police Chief, County Attorney. and
State's Attorney. that imposing a youth curfew in all or part of the County
is necessary to maintain public order in the affected area;
ill
issue an Executive Order. which must specify:
Lal
!Ill
each area of the County
wh~re
the curfew will take effect. if the
curfew does not apply
in
the entire County; and
the time period during which the curfew remains in effect unless
cancelled or modified by a lllleLExecutive Order; and
ill
notify the Council President of the issuance of the Order. post the Order
on the County website, and publish the Order in the next issue of the
County Register.
Any Executive Order issued under this subsection takes effect when the Order is
posted on the County
websit~.
unless the Order specifies a later date.
On page
8
ofthe Executive redraft, after line
179,
insert new Section 3:
Sec. 3. Sunset. County Code Section 32-23A. inserted by Section 1 of this Act. expires
on December 31. 2013.
F:\LAW\BILLS\1125 Curfew\Floreen Amendment l.Doc
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Positive Youth Development
MCPD Requested Data
In a communication dated
9/14/11
from Legislative Assistant Vivian Yao, MCPD was asked to
provide:
"Please provide youth crime statistics
as
measured by incident report (consistent
with the parameters used to determine youth crime in the August 2009 CountyStat
presentation) for calendar years 2006-2010, including the following:
(1)
total youth
crime numbers,
(2)
youth crime numbers broken out by incident start time, and (3)
youth crime numbers broken by incident start time and hot spot location. Please
indicate, if available, the number
of
youth crimes which are attributable to gang
activity or informal group activity (e.g., flash mobs, etc.)"
Using CountyStat's criteria from the August 2009 study and the same Records staff to extract
the data, CJIS incident data was pulled for:
:;.. "Youth crime" is defined as an incident where any defendant or suspect was under 22
years of age
:;.. Reported time values shown are incident start times only (for crimes where the exact
time is known, such as robbery or assault, this is useful, but it is not for any crime
typically having a lengthy time spans, such as burglary or vandalism).
:;.. Identified youth crime hot spots as locations with greater than 250 youth crimes per
square mile and targeted a half mile around the epicenter.
Requested:
1)
total youth crime numbers
Total Crime vs. Youth Crime
For the 5-year period of 2006 through 2010, overall crime trended down, whereas youth crime
remained steady at approximately 8% of the total crime.
2006
Total Crime
Youth Crime
%
Youth Crime
46,481
3.703
8.0%
2007
46.005
3.844
8.4%
2008
47,958
3.582
7.5%
2009
44,238
3.345
7.6%
2010
40.112
3.104
7.7%
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Total Crime
Vs.
Youth Crime
60,000
.---,--=""t'~...,.-----::---~.,.,-"'I7"=-;:-:~'
50,000
-r
"'-
~--:----=::---;:_==,.-...o.--'--"----;---=-,-,'-'
40, 000
-HI~-.lI~--f
~i'f---'"
30
,000
20,000
10,000
II
Total
Crime
.Youth
Crime
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Requested:
2)
youth crime numbers broken out by
incident
start
time
Time
of
Day
Total
youth crime broken down to 2-hour
blocks as used by
CountyStat in
2009
show
the largest
percentage
of youth crimes to
have
occurredlhave a start time of 2:00
PM
to 5:59
PM
for each
year 2006 through 2010
2006
2007
Total % of Day Total
%
of
Day
Midnioht -1
:59
AM
280
7.6%
277
7.2%
87
2.3%
67
1.7%
2:00 - 3:59
AM
31
35
4:00 - 5:59
AM
0.9%
0.8%
3.7%
6:00 - 7:59
AM
137
153
4.0%
254
6.9%
235
6.1%
8:00 - 9:59
AM
10:00 -11
:59AM
360
9.7%
357
9.3%
12:00 -1
:59
PM
416
11
.2%
423
11
.0%
57
1
2:00 - 3:59
PM
555
15.0%
14.9%
474
12.8%
4:00 - 5:59
PM
552
14.4%
434
11
.7%
6:00
-
7:59
PM
468
12.2%
9.8%
8:00 - 9:59
PM
406
10.6%
362
10:00 -
11 :59
PM
309
8.3%
304
7.9%
Total Youth Crime
3,703
3,844
2008
Total
% of Day
267
7.5%
2.3%
84
0.7%
26
103
2.9%
215
6.0%
343
9.6%
370
10.3%
549
15.3%
14.0%
500
450
12.6%
379
10.6%
296
8.3%
3,582
2009
Total
%
of
Day
7
.6%
254
1.9%
63
0.9%
29
116
3.5%
181
5.4%
308
9.2%
10.3%
343
15.8%
528
13.9%
464
410
12.3%
354
10.6%
295
8.8%
3,345
2010
Total
%
of Day
227
7.3%
75
2.4%
1.0%
32
2.7%
84
182
5.9%
313
10.1%
322
10.4%
494
15.9%
401
12.9%
357
11.5%
337
10.9%
280
9.0%
3,104
Requested.
3)
you
th
crime numbers broken by
incident
start time and hot spot location
Hot Spots
Incident data
for calendar year 2009 was
plotted
and
the areas
of higher concentration
remained
consistent
with CountyStat's previous findings for FY08
and
FY09
.
Using
the pre­
established
range
of
a
half-mile radius, incidents
within
the different
hot
spot zones
had differing
peak times
;
the Lakeforest
area
remained
busiest
in
the 2:00 PM
to
5:59 PM time frame, but
Westfield-Wheaton was 4:00
PM
to 7:50
PM, and
Silver Spring even
later
from
8:00 PM
to
11
:59
PM.
In
aggregate, the total
youth
crime within the
three
hot spot
zones
was
most active
from
400 PM
to
759
PM.
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
2009
Hot Spot
Youth Crime
Start Time
MidniQht - 1
:59
AM
lakeforest
Total
% of
Day
3.7%
1.6%
0.5%
0.0%
1.0%
4.2%
8.9%
22.0%
31.4%
17.8%
7.9%
1.0%
Westfield-Wht
Silver
Spring
Total
%
of
Day
5.3%
0.9%
0.9%
0.9%
1.8%
3.5%
9.7%
12.4%
12.4%
16.8%
17.7%
17.7%
Total Hot Spots
by
Tima
Total
2:00 -
3:59 AM
4:00 - 5:59 AM
6:00
·
7:59 AM
s:oo .
9:59
AM
10:00
·11:59
AM
12:00
-1 :59
PM
2:00·3:59
PM
4:00·5:59 PM
6:00
-
7:59
PM
S:OO· 9:59
PM
10:00 ·11:59 PM
Total
Youth Crime
7
3
1
0
2
8
17
42
60
34
15
2
191
Total
5
2
1
0
2
4
10
15
31
25
14
7
%
of
Dav
4.3%
1.7%
0.9%
0.0%
1.7%
3.4%
8
.6%
12.9%
26.7%
21.6%
12.1%
6.0%
6
1
1
1
2
4
11
14
14
19
20
20
11
3
18
6
3
1
6
16
38
71
105
78
49
29
420
%
of
Day
4.3%
1.4%
0.7%
0.2%
1.4%
3.8%
9.0%
16.9%
25
.0%
18.6%
11.7%
6.9%
116
Montgomery County
ANALYSIS
5th Police
Distfict
Density
at
2009
Youth
Crimes
,
-
18
D
19·
38
69
-
125
Key
D39-68
_126-202
CJ
Pa/ke
-
~~
Dt!!trict
Interstates
M2tlor Roads
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
The youth
crime
hot
spot areas for
calendar
year
2010 also remained consistent with
previous
time frames
,
with the
exception
with the White Oak area emerging as a fourth area with high
activity. Using
the
pre-established range of
a
half-mile radius
,
incidents
within
the
original hot
spot zones
had differing
peak
times, but the
percentage of peak
times were close
to
the nex1
busiest
times
and
covered
more two-hour blocks. However,
overall
the
peak
percentages
of
youth
crime in
the hot
spot
zones remained
2:00
PM to 5:59 PM
.
2010
Hot Spot
Youth Crime
Start Time
Midnioht
-
1:59
AM
Lakeforest
Westfield·Wht
Total
4
% of
Day
Silver Spring
Total
%
of
Day
7.8%
3.5%
Total Hot Spots
by
Time
Total
2:00 -
3:59 AM
4:00 - 5:59 AM
6:00
- 7:59
AM
B:OO
- 9:59
AM
10:00-11:59 AM
12:00 -1:59 PM
2:00 -
3:59 PM
4:00
- 5:59
PM
6:00 -
7:59
PM
8:00
-
9
:59
PM
10:00-11
:59
PM
Total
Youth Crime
Total
5
1
2
0
1
6
10
35
31
34
11
5
141
%
of Day
%
of
Da:L
4.9%
1.6%
3.5%
0.7%
1.4%
0.0'%
0.7%
4.3%
7.1%
24.8%
22.0%
24
.1%
7.8%
3.5%
1
0
0
1
1
16
27
22
21
15
5
113
3.5%
0.9%
0.0%
0.0%
0.9%
0.9%
9
4
14.2%
23.9%
19.5%
18.6%
13.3%
4.4%
1
0
2
5
11
14
20
17
13
19
115
0.9%
0.0%
1.7%
4.3%
9.6%
12.2%
17.4%
14.8%
1B
6
3
0
4
12
37
76
73
72
0.8%
0.0%
1.1
%
3.3%
10.0%
20.6%
19.8%
19.5%
10.6%
11.3%
16,5%
39
29
369
7.9%
Montgomery County
Density
of
2010
Youth Crimes
1
- 14
0
15-26
27
-
""
47 -
BO
Key
0
_
D
-
Police
District
Interstates
61-150
- -
Major Roads
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Montgomery County
2010 Youth Crimes
Lakeforest
\"
<
,,
,
"
"
,
"
,
''',
Key
2010
Youth Cnmes
264
0ft
~
Building
foolpmtB
.
-
Imcrstatcs
-
-
5<_
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
,
~.
2010
You1h
Crimes
Key
'
...
""'(f'
2640
ft
8uft'er
Sulllinl)
FOO'tpi1b
-In~
"""""
The change of overall youth crime for each
time
block
remained
within
one
percentage point
from
2009
to
2010.
However, the
percentages in
the
hot spot zones (in aggregate)
showed
a
3.7% increase for the
2:00
to
3:59
PM block, and a decrease of 5.2%
in
the 4:00 to
5:59
PM
block.
Total
Youth
Crime
Hotspot
Youth Crime
Percentage
2009
201u
Percentage
by
Total
Change
Percentage
by
Time
Time
2009 - 2010
4.3%
4.9%
0.6
1
%
1.6%
0
.2%
1.4%
2009
Start
Time
2010
Time
Percentage
by
Percentage
by
Midnight
-
1
:59
AM
2:00
-
3:59 AM
4:00
- 5:59 AM
6:00 - 7:59 AM
8:00
- 9:59
AM
10:00
-11
:59
AM
12:00
-
1:59 PM
2:00 -
3
:59
PM
4:00
-
5:59 PM
6:00
- 7:59 PM
8:00
- 9:59 PM
10:00
-1
1:59 PM
Time
7.6%
Percen tage
Total Change
2009
- 2010
7.3%
2.4%
1.9%
0.9%
3.5%
5.4%
9.2%
10.3%
15.8%
13.9%
12.3%
1.0%
2.7%
5.9'%
10
.1%
10.4%)
·0.3%
0.5%
0.1%
-0.8%
0
.5%
0.9%
0.1
%
0.1
%
0
.7%
0.2%
1
.4%
3.8%
9.0%
16.9%
25.0%
0.8%
0.0%
1
.1'%
3.3%
0.
1%
-0
.2%
-0.3%
-0.5%
1.0%
3.7%
10.6%
8.8%
15.9%
12.9%
11.5%
10.9%
9.0%
-1
.0%
-0 .8%
10.0%
20
.6%
19.8%
-5.2%
0.9%
-1.1%
0.3%
0.2%
18.6%
11
.7%
6
.9%
19.5°/1)
10.6%
7.9%
1.0%
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Requested: indicate, if available, the number of youth crimes which are attributable to gang
activity or informal group activity (e.g., flash mobs, etc.)"
Of the 232 gang-related incidents in 2010, 166 (72%) involved a defendant or suspect who was
under the age of 22. The top five gang member-involved incidents committed by "youth" were:
1) CDS, 2) Assault, 3) Robbery, 4) Larceny, and 5) Weapons offenses.
Crime
• Assault
I
Auto Theft
• Burglary
CDS
• Disorderly
· Extortion
Homicide
· Larceny
Rape
Robbery
Sex offense
Threats
Trespassing
Vandalism/Graffiti*
Weapons
Grand Total
2010 total
gang-
related
36
7
14
38
5
1
3
20
2
29
1
5
2
54
15
232
o
or Swas
%
committed
under 22
31
7
13
35
5
1
0
19
2
29
0
3
2
4
15
166
by
"youth"
86%
100%
93%
92%
100%
100%
0%
95%
100%
100%
0%
60%
100%
7%
100%
72%
*Usually there are no specific suspects in vandalism/graffiti cases
Data Notes:
?
The Department's CJIS RMS was used to extract the data, only one record per CR# was pulled
and this methodology does not necessarily equate with UCR accounting rules. For example, an
assault having three victims will count as "one" record in this data, not three.
Events from earlier years reported in a later year will be counted in the year reported.
In August 2009 CountyStat pulled their own data directly from Mary Davison and did their own
analysis and maps. Parameters were verified with CountyStat staff, but they were tasked with
summarizing things by FY and not calendar year, as done here. The information in this document
should not be used for any direct comparison to the August 2009 information.
For the hot spot maps, approximately 96% of the 2009 incidents plotted, and 98% of the 2010
incidents.
Multiple incidents at the same street location will appear as a single "dot" on the hot spot zoom-in
maps.
?
?
?
?
CRIMl:
CAS
#
11-508
October 6, 2011
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Staffing Plan
• 24 additional officers were budgeted for
the 3rd District to take effect July 1, 2011
• 18 positions came from positions that
were eliminated or civilianized
• 6 SRO positions were reinstated therefore
6 additional officers were authorized and
began the police academy on July 1,
2011. They will be assigned in January of
2012.
3
rd
District Increased staffing
Breakdown of officers:
• -2 sergeants
• -4 corporals
• -18 officers
Assignments
• -CSD Team- 2 sergeants, 10 officers
• -Ida increased staffing- 4 corporals, 8
officers (4 additional redeployed from
George Sector)
1
®
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Timeline:
• CaD team started on August 1, 2011
• 8 additional officers assigned to Ida Sector
July/August 2011
• Remaining 6 officers to be assigned upon
completion of academy (January 2012)
Staffing Issues:
• The CSD plan went forward first due to the
immediate issues that were present, the Ida
Sector plan had to come in two phases
• All of the 18 positions came from positions that
were eliminated or civilianized; by contract
volunteers had to
be
considered first. Most have
arrived however some promotions and transfers
are outstanding.
• Since July 1, 6 officers have been lost to
specialized units, transfers and resignation.
Fillmore
• Opened Sept 15, 2011
• Several sold out events since opening
• Minimal impact on traffic (after opening night)
• Weekly meetings occurring between Fillmore
and MCP 3
rd
District executive staff
• Program schedules and ticket sales information
is forwarded regularly
• A meeting was held on Oct. 4
to
address some
alcohol related problems
CSD
Team Efforts Since August 1
Total arrests
-
-
CDS charges
Disorderly
Criminal Citations
Alcohol Citations
Field Interviews
Warrants served
Trespass notices
Parking tickets
113
30
21
40
64
146
31
83
102
2
®
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Crime stats CBD (George 1)
• 1.5 robberies per month in CBD since
August 1, 2011; previous years averaged
6 per month
• 1 aggravated assault in
CBD
since August
1, 2011: previous average was 3 per 2
month period
• Preliminary numbers
Crime Stats Ida Sector
Avg. per month since Aug
1.
2011 Previous Monthly Avg.
Robbery
Aggravated Assault
Residential Burglary
2.5
3.5
9
8.5
3.6
25.8
• Preliminary numbers
(B
3
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Testimony of Woody Brosnan, vice chairman of Safe Silver Spring
9101 Louis Ave., Silver Spring, Md. 20910
240-481-0309
July 26, 2011
Thank you for allowing me to testify. Safe Silver Spring is a non-profit
organization dedicated to keeping Silver Spring a community where people
of all backgrounds and ages can prosper and en-joy themselves in safety.
Gangs threaten this safety. Most Silver Spring neighborhoods are gang-free
but members of regional gangs do prey on the community, partially
because of the popularity of our entertainment district and the availability
of transit. In one recent incident, two gangs organized a late-night rumble
in downtown Silver Spring, forcing a massive police response that left
neighborhoods as far as Wheaton and Bethesda depleted of patrols. Our
police need tools to try to break up such gatherings before violence erupts.
We support the idea of a teen curfew but the current proposal needs some
important modifications before we can fully endorse it.
The curfew should apply to youths 16 and under, not 17 and under. This
would conform the age to the curfew in Prince George's County and the
District of Columbia. We also believe there should be reasonable exception
to allow youths to attend movies and concerts that extend through the
curfew hour.
We believe the Youth Advisory Council should be consulted on this and
other possible exceptions before the curfew is put in place. There also
needs to be appropriate monitoring to ensure the curfew is not being used
for racial profiling.
We urge the Council and other county officials to work with their
counterparts in DC and Prince George's County on a common curfew. Area
teens need one set of rules to follow when they cross jurisdictions on the
Metro. This will be even more important when we build the Purple Line.
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Gangs are no longer isolated to home neighborhoods either. Using text
messages and email they can organize flash mobs anywhere in the area.
Safe Silver Spring has called for a regional anti-gang summit to plan a
regional strategy for combating gangs.
A curfew alone is not the answer to ensuring a safe environment for teens.
We need positive youth development programs
J
continued and expanded
truancy court programs
J
and a teen center in Silver Spring.
We need a system of public security cameras covering key intersections in
the Central Business District. Chief Manger has told us that most
entertainment districts have them. Had this system been in place it is
possible that some of the gang members involved in the July 1-2 incident
could have been charged with crimes later.
The business community also should resist the temptation to make an extra
buck by enticing teenagers to be out after midnight. This last Saturday night
there were 10 PG or G-rated movies at the Regal Majestic in Silver Spring
that started after 11 p.m. The latest was a 12:50 a.m. showing of Captain
America that did not end until after the trains and buses had stopped
running.
let me just close on an historical note.
For more than 100 years the Progressive Movement in the United States
has been associated with the goal of protecting children. It was the
progressives who passed laws to get children out of coal mines and textile
mills. Progressives pushed for universal education so that every child would
have a chance to succeed.
Protecting children
J
sometimes even from their own foolishness
J
is
progressive.
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
\0
Testimony of
The Greater Silver Spring Chamber of Commerce
Public Hearing - Expedited
Bill 25-11,
Offenses - Curfew - Established
Montgomery County Council
Tuesday, July 26, 2011
Council President Ervin, members of the Council, good afternoon. For the record, my name is Jane
Redicker and I am President of the Greater Silver Spring Chamber of Commerce. I am here today to
express the Chamber's support for Expedited Bill 25-11 , which would establish a curfew for minors in
Montgomery County.
We agree with the County Executive and the Montgomery County Police that this legislation is
necessary to address the increase injuvenile violence, juvenile gang activity, and crime by minors in
our County. We also agree that a curfew law will serve to protect the welfare of minors by reducing
the likelihood that minors will be the victims of criminal acts during the curfew hours and reducing the
likelihood that minors will become involved in criminal acts or exposed to trafficking in controlled
substances during the curfew hours. And, we agree that a curfew law will serve to help protect the
general public from juvenile related criminal activity.
Similar laws exist in Washington D.C. and Prince George's County, and we understand from County
Police that this creates challenges for Montgomery County, particularly for those areas that abut these
neighboring jurisdictions. We agree that enacting a law that closely mirrors the practice in these
jurisdictions makes sense. It's worth noting that this legislation is not intended to give police a
mandate to "round up" every minor out after the curfew hours.
It
is meant to be a tool for police to
help address youth crime and gang activity.
When the U.S. Conference of Mayors studied cities in which nighttime curfews had been
implemented, they found that ninety-three percent of the survey cities (257) saw nighttime curfews as a
useful tool for police officers. Many felt that curfews represented a proactive way to combat youth
violence. They said curfews are a good prevention tool, keeping the good kids good and keeping the
at-risk kids from becoming victims or victimizers.
We do recommend that the bill be amended to mirror the provision in the District of Columbia that
provides for a later hour during summer months. In addition, we recognize that many of our youth
patronize businesses where events may begin before the curfew hours but end after (e.g. movie
theaters, concert venues). Therefore, we also recommend that the provisions of the bill which exempt
youth attending
--
or on their way home from -- an official school, religious, or other recreational
activity sponsored by the County or a civic organization, be amended so as to also cover these private
business venues. We understand that this is consistent with the practice in Prince George's County.
Our Chamber applauds the efforts of the Montgomery County Police in keeping our County safe and
secure, and helping making it an attractive place to live, work, and play. We strongly support this
etlort to give them just one more tool to curb youth crime and to keep our youth safe from crime
during the hours covered by the curfew. We urge you to support Bill 25-11.
8601 Georgia Avenue, Suite 203, Silver Spring, Maryland 20910
Phone: 301-565-3777
-
Fax: 301-565-3377
-
irifo @gsscc.org
-
www.silverspringchamber.com
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Page 1 of2
Marin, Sandra
From:
Sent:
To:
jwoden@comcast.net
Tuesday, July 19, 2011 7:18 PM
Montgomery County Council
Subject: Bill No. 25-11: Offenses -Curfew
Ladies and Gentlemen:
I am writing to express my 100% opposition to the subject Bill.
The bill as written would make my child a criminal for many legal activities. Examples are:
1. Traveling with my 20 year old daughter during the proposed curfew hours to sporting events,
concerts, movies, etc..
2. My child traveling with his/her friends to sporting events, concerts, school dances, etc. These
kids are allowed to drive legally once they are 16 years old. The MD-DMV already
regulates young drivers.
3. My child could not participate in State sponsored activities such as Youth Hunting
Days. 5:00am is not early enough to travel to a hunting spot, get into the field, walk to a hunting
spot and then be ready to hunt at the legal time of 30 minutes before sunrise. And yes, people
are allowed to hunt in Montgomery County.
4. My child could not go fishing in the early morning hours much the same as hunting as I state
under item #3.
5. My child could not go camping with a group of his friends during the proposed curfew hours.
6. Why must my child carry an "authorization" (written, I presume) for my child to travel with a
aunt, uncle or adult friend of mine? My child would be restricted from traveling with anyone out
of high school and less than 21 years of age (see #1 above).
My child is not even a resident of Montgomery County but my child's freedoms for the activities
he/she enjoys with his/her friends who live in Montgomery County would be eliminated under the Bill
No. 25-11.
I understand you want to curb youth crime and gang activity. Kids are in gangs because they don't
get love at home now. If you don't believe me, ask your Police Chief. If those youth who participate
in criminal activities and gangs now are not supervised by their parents now, do you think parents will
supervise their children after the passage of this Bill? I would bet big money they would not! Why are
you trying to mandate what current, responsible parents do now! This proposed Bill is a prime
example of government interfering in a person's rights; parents and children. I don't need
Montgomery County to be a nanny to my children or the children of my friends who live in
Montgomery County.
What is the percentage of irresponsible children and parents as opposed to the percentage of good
and responsible parents in Montgomery County? It appears to me that the majority of law abiding
citizens would be affected by the passage of bill. I would bet the percentage of good and responsible
parents far exceeds the percentage of irresponsible children and parents. The passage of this bill is
like "throwing out the baby with the bath water" in my eyes. It will result in good kids and adults being
charged as criminals for now legal and wholesome activities young and old citizens now enjoy.
If you want to curb gang activities, stop supporting illegal immigration. Stop acting as the sanctuary
County you are now. I guess you know you are only second to California in supporting and harboring
illegal residents in the United States. Why do you think the majority of residents who were born and
raised in Montgomery County no longer live there. I fall in that category. It is because of
7/20/2011
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Page 20f2
your extreme liberal positions and the need to regulate nearly every facet of your citizens lives.
The way I see
it,
this bill is an infringement on your citizens rights of "Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of
Happiness".
Sincerely,
Jerome Oden
jwoden@comcast.net
7/20/2011
@
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Action
COlnmittee
for Transit
WlI'W,
actlQI:i,-q~;sit,
wI!
July 28. 2011
Ms. Valerie Ervin
President, Montgomery County Council
100 Maryland Ave.
Rockville, MD 20850
Subject: Teenage Curfew
Dear Ms. Ervin:
The Action Committee for Transit urges the Council to reject the proposed teenage
curfew and to actively pursue other means of ensuring that downtown Silver Spring is a
safe and secure place that our entire community can enjoy. Part of the solution is better
community policing, using officers on foot and bicycle at night as well as in the daytime.
We were quite disturbed to read the police department's explanation of the curfew
in the Wednesday
Washington Post.
It
is apparent that the curfew would be enforced
against teenagers on foot or in public transit, but not in cars.
Not only is this discriminatory, but teenagers will drive to avoid the curfew.
Putting rowdy teenagers on the roads late at night will certainly not make the county
safer.
For that matter. teenagers in cars already cause far more deaths and injuries than
teenagers on foot or in transit vehicles. We are so accustomed to the carnage caused by
overdependence on the automobile that we frequently overlook it. A much greater gain
in public safety would come from a curfew on teenage drivers than from the current
curfew proposal. We are not recommending additional Hmits on teenage driving here, but
we do
ask
that the police collect data on deaths and injuries from vehicular accidents
involving teen drivers so that effective action can be taken in the future.
The traditional urban fonn of downtown Silver Spring is not an experiment that is
at risk. Rather, it is part of the solution for the limitations and inherent risks of suburban
design. The renaissance of our downtowns not just Silver Spring, but also Bethesda,
Rockville and soon White Flint and Wheaton will fully succeed only when they are
welcoming environments for everyone in the county. This requires strenuous efforts to
ensure safety, but not a safety achieved by excluding one segment of the population.
Sincerely.
Ben Ross
Vice President
@
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Till:
GREATER
1910
Woodmant Avenue.
Suite 1204
fleU.esdo. MD20814
T; {301}
652·4900
F: (301)
657-1973
stal/@tx;cc;/Iomber.orfl
BETHESDA-CHEVY CHASE
CHAivIBER OF C0i\1r-.1IRCF
VIA EMAIL
July 26,2011
The Honorable Valerie Ervin, President
and Members of the Montgomery County Council
100 Maryland Avenue, 6th :Floor
Rockville, Maryland 20850
Re: Expedited Bi1125-II, Offenses-Curfew-Established
Dear Ms. Ervin and Members of the County Council:
www.bccchomber.org
On behalf of The Greater Bethesda-Chevy Chase Chamber of Commerce (B-CC Chamber), we are writing in regards to
Expedited Bill 25-11, which proposes the establishment of a new curfew for minors and related recommendations.
As we understand, the impetus of this legislation is due to the increased number of incidents caused by youth from outside our
County who are congregating in Silver Spring and causing an increased need for security_ We also understand that this issue is
critical to the safety and continued success of area businesses in the Silver Spring area, as well as the safety for citizens and
visito rs to that area.
Our concern is that this proposal seems to be a shotgun approach without having conducted the needed research which would
detemline if this is the best solution to the issue. We recommend that between July 26,h and the Public Safety Committee's
worksession on September 15
th ,
expedited research be conducted as to the impact that curfews have had in other similar
communities, including measurements of success and/or failure, and other solutions that have successfully been implemented.
Like all other legislation, we
u~e
the County to complete the research as to the fiscal impact of the curfew or any other option,
in advance of the September IS' worksession.
Given the current situation and the needs ofthe business community and the community as a whole, inaction is not an option.
We recommend that instead of enforcing a blanket curfew on all youth throughout the County, the County should first know
that all methods of dealing with this panicular problem have been explored and a curfew is the best tool to achieve the goal. If
that is the case, we strongly urge that a sunset provision of no more than one year be included so that this issue can be reviewed
again as to its impact and need.
Thank you for your considemtion of our recommendations.
Sincerely,
Leslie Ford Weber, Chair
(Suburban Hospital)
~Y/JJ~
··~EAGlEBANK
Heather Dlhopolsky. VP, Economic Development
&
Government Affairs
(Linowes and Blocher)
2011 Annual Sponsors
Platinum:
Gold:
Lerch. Early,
&
Brewer. Chtd.
Silver:
BOO USA' The Chevy Chese Land Company' Exect Target·
M&
T Bank' Suburban Hospital
Corporate:
Barwooci
Tl'9nsportetton'
Bond Beebe Accountants
&
AdvIsors'
Councilor.
Bucllanan
&
MitChell
P.C
Dembo.
JOflflS.
Healy, Pennington
&
Marshall.
P.C.•
Doubleree
by Hillon Bethesda'
Elite
Personnel' The
GazElle' GrOSSberg
Company LLP
Holland
&
Knight
LLP
Hyatt
Regency
Bslhesda
Llnowes and Blocher
• MeniN
Lynch
-
Melanie Fats/ad·
PNC
Bank. Wllite Flint
Malt
f""
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
UPCOUNTY CITIZENS ADVISORY BOARD
October 21,2011
The Honorable Valerie Ervin, President
Montgomery County Council
100 Maryland Avenue
Rockville, Maryland 20850
Dear Ms. Ervin:
I am wTitingon behalf of the Upcounty Citizen's Advisory Board (UCAB) regarding the County
Executive Leggett's proposed Bill 25-11, which would establish a youth curfew in Montgomery
County. Following a lengthy discussion spanning three meetings, the UCAB has voted to
support the bill (by a vote of six to five) as wTitten with current amendments.
The debate on both sides was open, knowledgeable, supported by research and facts, and
sometimes emotional. Clearly, the bill contains provisions which will help deter juveniles from
both committing crimes and being victims of crimes during the proposed curfew hours. The
primary benefits of the bill include:
• It
provides law enforcement officials with an additional tool to prevent crimes involving
juveniles less than 18 years of age.
The bill will detract juveniles from engaging in gang activity.
By restricting hours that young people will be out in public, it will prevent minors from
becoming victims of crimes.
Applying a curfew reduces the incidence of minors from neighboring jurisdictions
crossing into Montgomery County to avoid curfews where they live.
Parental authority will be enhanced since parents will have justification for setting
household limits on when a teen or pre-teen has to be home.
A curfew is an attractive crime deterrent because there will be a negligible budgetary cost
effect.
Because of the high degree of training and professional experience by our Montgomery
County Police Officers, the UCAB is confident that profiling of certain youth will not be
an issue.
The concerns of the individuals opposed to the bill include the following:
• There is little evidence of a widespread problem.
• The proposed bill, if passed as written, may likely be challenged in court.
12900 Middlebrook Road,
Suite
1000 • Germantown, Maryland 20874
240/777-8000, TTY
2401777-8002.
FAX
2401777-800
I •
www.montgomerycolllltymd.gov/upcollnty
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Council President Ervin
October 21,2011
Page Two of Two
• There is no explicit mention of parental notification in the bill.
• There are too many exceptions in the bill, both in terms of acceptable activities wherein
the curfew would not be invoked and actual jurisdictions where the bill would not apply
at alL
During the discussion, various individuals submitted additional items for consideration. These
included:
• A current assessment of juvenile crime/and crimes involving juveniles as victims should
be provided with actual data along with projections/targets of crime reduction after
implementation of the curfew.
• The county may want to consider a sunset date for the curfew some two or three years out
from the date of initial implementation.
• A stronger curfew law containing fewer exceptions should be considered.
• Funding should be approved to conduct a multi-language awareness campaign.
• Clarify the impact on non-resident juveniles.
• Continue to pursue initiatives like the grant to acquire surveillance cameras for hot spots.
• Whenever possible pursue opportunities for positive youth development activities and
include those activities within the curfew exemptions to encourage participation by
juveniles.
• A process should be developed to expeditiously adjudicate complaints lodged under a
curfew law.
As an advisory board, we appreciate the opportunity to provide input on matters under
consideration before the County Council. Thank you.
Sincerely,
\J\~
\'
vV·
h.
~
...
-~--:>
~-\
Juan Cardenas
Chair
Copy to: Mr. Leggett, County Executive
12900 Middlebrook Road, Suite 1000 • Germantown, Maryland 20874
2401777-8000, TTY 2401777-8002. FAX 2401777-8001 • www.rnontgornerycountyrnd.gov!upcounty
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Serving the Public Interest Since 1925
Monday, November 21, 2011
Dear Council President Ervin and Councilmembers:
At its November general meeting, the MCCF members voted to
support Council
Bm 35--11,
"Offenses-Loitering or Prowling-Established" as a means of addressing concerns about street
crime problems occurring in the County. It provides an approach that applies uniformly to all
segments of the population at all times of the day and has a reasonable legal basis for
enforcement.
At this same November meeting, the MCCF membership voted to
oppose
Bm 25--11,
"Offenses­
Curfew-Established" for the following reasons;
I.
According to the Sept.
13
th
letter from the County Executive, the proposed curfew law's
penalties have been reduced to
a
Class
B
civil fine which eliminated any authority for'
police to arrest violators.
2.
The ability to require community service and parent training for curfew violators and
their families have also been removed which stripes the rehabilitative objectives from the
legislation.
3. The longstanding body of empirical research shows that curfews alone have little effect
on reducing crime, and supporting measures employed by other jurisdictions such as
curfew centers were not planned in conjunction with the adoption ofthe County's curfew
law.
4. Concerns about
the
inability oftnc
t:urt~w
to restrict potential criminal
activitiea
committed by individuals
18
yt:ilrS
or
Older during non-curfew hours.
5.
The ability of youths who
simply
declare themselves as being
18
years old to be
exempted from further polict: QLll:s1ioning
if
there is no further cause for stopping them,
and
6. The legal uncertainty to which officers would be subject in determining a youth's
eligibility for the many curfew exemptions while questioning him or her on the street.
Given the totality of these concems, the cUlfew law appears to be an ineffective solution to the
public safety concerns that generated its proposal.
However, laws such as this do have th.:: potential for misuse and abuse by law enforcement
officers and could threaten basic citizen;' lights
if
applied in a discriminatory, harsh or
oppressive manner. We would
strongly
recommend that the County Council take a proactive
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
approach in this regard by establishing an annual reporting requirement that would document
how these laws, if either or both are adopted, are being applied by the County's law enforcement
personnel. Such a report should include the following data items:
number of incidents involving curfew violation/loitering/prowling charges
a frequency count of arrests made per incident for these charges
day of week/time of day frequency counts for incidents involving these charges
number of arrestees by appropriate age groups, e.g., <18, 18 to 25, 26 to 65,and >65 years
of age
• number of arrestees by race/ethnicity
• number of incidents by location type, Le., commercial, residential, industrial, public
facilities/parks, or other places
• incidents displayed on a County map in 'order to detennine their geographic distribution
This would enable the County Council and Executive to assess the effect and application of these
laws for future decisions regarding their continuation or possible modification.
If the application of these laws is primarily intended for periodic crackdowns by the police in
particular areas of the County, the cautions raised by the Center for Problem-Oriented Policing
for such actions should be heeded.
Poorly planned, ill-conceived, and improperly managed crackdowns, intended merely as a
show of police force and resolve, can create more problems than they solve. But carefully
planned crackdowns, well supported by prior probJem analysis, implemented with other
responses to ensure longer-term gains, and conducted in a way that maintains public
support and safeguards civil
right.~,
can be an important and effective part of police
strategies regarding a range of crime and disorder problems.
- excerpted from
The Benefirs and Consequences ofPolice Crackdowns,
www.popcenter.org/responseslpolice__crackdownsll
We would hope that these measures would achieve the objective of promoting public safety
while also protecting citizen's righ;::s to fi:eedom of movement and to meet and congregate
without interference from govemmcl1t.
Thank you for this opportunity
t,)
o:'fur
our opini.::m on this matter.
Sincerely,
Peggy Dennis, President
Montgomery County Civic Federation
Cc: County Executive Isiah Leggett
Police Chief Thomas Manger