Agenda

Return

C.111

To:	Board of Supervisors
From:	PUBLIC PROTECTION COMMITTEE
Date:	December 13, 2011

Contra

Costa

County

Subject:

STATUS REPORT ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF A DAYTIME CURFEW ORDINANCE IN THE UNINCORPORATED COUNTY AREA

APPROVE	OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR	RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE

Action of Board On: 12/13/2011

APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED

OTHER

Clerks Notes:

VOTE OF SUPERVISORS

AYE:

John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor

Contact:	JULIE ENEA (925) 335-1077
cc:	County Counsel District Attorney Sheriff CAO

I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 13, 2011
,

BY:	, Deputy

RECOMMENDATION(S):

ACCEPT status report on the development of a daytime curfew ordinance to help reduce truancy.

FISCAL IMPACT:

None. This is an informational report only.

BACKGROUND:

This matter was referred to the PPC on April 12, 2011 at the request of the District Attorney, who suggested under Public Comment at the April 4 PPC meeting that the Committee consider enacting a daytime curfew ordinance to reduce truancy.

BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)

There is a great need for students to stay in school and graduate. Failure of students to remain in school and graduate has long-term criminal and financial consequences. Consider that high school dropouts are 3½ times more likely to be arrested, over 8 times more likely to be in jail. About 68% of state prison inmates across the county have not received a diploma. For each year’s worth of high school dropouts, California suffers an estimated $46 billion in economic losses, including $12 billion in crime costs alone. The graduation rate in Contra Costa County is 83.8%.

PPC received an in-depth report on May 2 and decided to pursue an ordinance for a daytime curfew for minors. Several counties throughout the state of California have successful anti-truancy programs. The former District Attorney of San Francisco, Kamala Harris, instituted a successful anti-truancy program and helped reduce truancy in San Francisco County by 23%. That reduction brought in $300,000 per year in additional funds to the school district because of increased attendance.

Within two months of the May 2 PPC meeting, the City of Concord enacted a daytime curfew ordinance, which the District Attorney has proposed as a model for a county unincorporated area ordinance. Six additional Contra Costa cities have adopted daytime curfew ordinances: El Cerrito, Hercules, Pinole, Pittsburg, Richmond, and San Pablo.

Following are highlights of the Concord daytime curfew ordinance, which is attached hereto for reference:

• Defines daytime curfew hours as the period of the minor’s regular scheduled school hours when school is in session, and nighttime curfew hours as the hours between midnight and 5:00 a.m. for minors (persons under the age of 18).

• Provides that any minor who is present in or about a public place during curfew hours is guilty of an infraction, and any parent who knowingly permits a minor to violate the curfew is also guilty of an infraction.

• Would permit officers to detain truants and, on first offense, issue a warning citation to their parents, who would have to sign and return the notification with an explanation, if there is one.

• Upon subsequent violations during the same 12-month period, the minor will be fined up to $100 for the first subsequent offense, up to $200 for the second offense, and up to $500 for any additional violations. Parents who knowingly permit minors to violate the curfew can also be cited and fine under the same schedule.

• States that officers can transport the truants back to school once they are cited.

• Provides a list of reasonable exceptions.

Staff from the District Attorney’s Office presented the District Attorney’s recommendations on November 7, 2011. In a follow-up report on December 5, the District Attorney clarified some aspects of the ordinance. For example, the curfew ordinance governing the area where a violation occurs prevails, regardless of where a person lives. Adoption of a daytime curfew ordinance may encourage truants to congregate in those areas of the county that do not have curfews. Alternately, failure to adopt a curfew ordinance for the unincorporated area may make the unincorporated area a magnet for truants.

The Sheriff supports the ordinance in concept but was concerned about setting up unrealistic public expectations about the Sheriff's ability to enforce the ordinance. While the Sheriff appreciates having another "tool in the toolbox", staffing shortages do not support the beat coverage that will allow them to respond to truancy complaints. The District Attorney’s office clarified, in this regard, that the Education Code currently authorizes law enforcement officers to return a child to school if he/she is truant. The curfew ordinance would extend that authority by adding a criminal sanction, ranging from a citation to graduating monetary fines. The ordinance places no additional obligation on local law enforcement but provides additional authority to officers to combat chronic truancy.

In response to the Sheriff's concerns, the PPC suggested that the schools might be willing to coordinate with local law enforcement to lessen the burden on beat officers of returning truants to school. It was also suggested that retired police or probation officers might be willing to volunteer part time as school truancy officers.

Our Committee has asked the County Counsel to use the City of Concord’s ordinance as a model and to draft a daytime curfew ordinance for the county unincorporated area for the Committee’s consideration in February 2012.

VOTE OF SUPERVISORS

RECOMMENDATION(S):

FISCAL IMPACT:

BACKGROUND:

BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)

CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:

CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: