Loading...
CC - Item 5B - AB 1151 (GOLDSMITH) - Citation of Minors for Truancy on School Days F o y staff.eport TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS ROSEMEAD CITY COUNCIL FROM: FRANK G. TRIPEPI, CITY MANAGER DATE: MAY 7, 1997 RE: AB 1151 (GOLDSMITH) - CITATION OF MINORS FOR TRUANCY ON SCHOOL DAYS This item has been placed on the agenda at the request of Councilmember Clark. AB 1151 would amend current law to make it an infraction for a school aged child to loiter during regular school hours, and allow peace officers to issue citations for that offense. Currently, State law authorizes peace officers, certain school officials and probation officers to assume "temporary custody" of school aged children found to be truant. AB 1151 seeks to change that law to allow peace officers to write citations for the infraction of not being in school. The bill does provide for an affirmative defense to the infraction when a child is accompanied by a parent, in transit to or from a medical appointment, has permission to leave campus or is en route to a compulsory alternative education program. Attached is a copy of the bill, an analysis from the Assembly Public Safety Committee and an information sheet prepared by Councilmember Clark. The bill will be heard next by the Assembly Appropriations Committee. No hearing date has been set. ccmemo.abl 151Sgt .COUNCIL AGENDA MAY 13 1997 ITEM No. • A I ALERT --- DAYTIME CURFEWS A bill (AB1151) to impose statewide mandatory daytime curfewsis moving through the Califor- nia legislature, ostensibly to get kids into school and cut crime. Please consider what is actu- ally happening: In one city innocent children have reportedly been stopped numerous times while actually on their way to or from class and must show ID. They are essentially required to ASK PERMIS- SION to, walk outside their homes. They are "guilty until proven innocent." "So, What" you may say? VIOLATES FREEDOM: Our legislators won't even require ANY FORM OF I.D. for the accuracy of VOTING but our CHILDREN have to show ID to merely walk outside !!! UNNECESSARY DUPLICATION OF EXISTING STATE LAWS: Truancy laws are already in place. California law states "The attendance supervisor or his or her designee, a peace officer,a school administrator or his or her designee, or a probation officer may arrest, assume temporary custody, during school hours, of any minor subject to, compulsory full time education or to compulsory continuation education found away from his or her home and who is absent from school without valid excuse within the county, city, or city and county or school district:" (California Education Code 48764) IMPRACTICAL: • Public and private schools have overlapping vacations, parent-conference days, year-round school schedules. There is NO WAY police can OR SHOULD keep track of all of them. COSTLY: While police are questioning innocent children they are NOT patrolling or stopping actual crime in another part of the city. Cash-strapped cities should not be spending scarce dollars as truant officers.. DISCRIMINATORY: To be totally fair, officers would have to stop ALL children during school hours, which is waste- ful. To be practical, they will stop ONLY those who LOOK like "the type". INTIMIDATING: Being stopped by a police officer is intimidating at best and undermines the thousands of dollars cities have spent to better law enforcement's image through community oriented polic- ing. DANGEROUS: Because police can take the child to the station or the school, a pedophile can impersonate police and demand an unsuspecting, cooperative child to get in his car. • • • AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY APRIL 3, 1997 '' ' �ax ,-^� is iYc�a•�_�� �`�i3 s r_, ;'_ .' -. ` CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE-1997-98 REGULAR SESSION. w } ? r a_ ASSEMBLY BIL a 'No; 1151: •- Introduced by Assembly Member Goldsmith = February 28, 1997 • • An act to add Section 255.5 t-e the Wclfarc fiaad Institutiena 48264.2 to the Education Code, relating to minors. • LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST AB 1151, as amended, Goldsmith. Minors: infraction. (1) Under existing law,subject to the orders of the juvenile court, a traffic hearing officer is authorized to hear and dispose of any case in which a minor under 18 years of age is ) charged with loitering or curfew violations or other specified efense offenses. Existing law authorizes a peace officer, a school administrator or his or her designee, the attendance supervisor or his or her designee, or a probation officer to arrest or assume temporary custody, during school hours, of any minor subject to compulsory full-tune education or compulsory continuation education, as specified. This bill -would, with specified exceptions, make it an infraction for a minor who is found to be loitering during regular school hours on days when the student's school is in - session.As an.alternative to arresting or assuming temporary custody ofa minor, an authorized individual would be able to cite a minor for a violation. A violation dmay be referred to a traffic hearing officer for disposition. . 98 • AB '1151 -2— (2) The. California. Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state:'- Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement., This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason: Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes. State-mandated local program: yes. The people of the State of California do enact as follows: 1 SECTION 4- Lection 2,555is added to the Welfare 2 liastitftgehs Code,te read: 3 255.5. (a) 4 .-. - SECTION 1. Section 48264.2 is added to the . 5 Education Code, to read:• 6 48264.2. (a) Any person. authorized under Section • 7 48264 to arrest or assume temporary custody of a minor 8 may,alternatively, cite and release the minor as provided 9 in this section. 10 , (b) Notwithstanding any other law, except as 11 provided by subdivision (b) (c),any minor who is subject 12 to compulsory education or to compulsory continuation 13 education, who is found to be loitering in or upon public 14 streets, highways, roads, alleys, parks, playgrounds, or 15 other public grounds during regular school hours on days 16 when the student's school is in session,may be cited by a 17 peace officer, as defined in Section 8304 ef the Penal . 18 Codc, era seheel peace of icer ef seheel police rescue 19 officer, fas described in Sections 39670 72330 ef the 20 _ eatien Code,any authorized individual for the public 21 offense of leaving campus without an excuse,which shall 22 be an infraction, and which may be referred to a traffic 23 hearing officer for disposition. i 24 (b) 25 . (c) A minor has an affirmative defense to the • 26 infraction cited under subdivision (a) (b) if any of the 27 following conditions exist: i I � ( 98 1 i . .M_. •••••••• ' ••••• -.• . • . : • • • • • • . . . —3— "AB 1151 1 - (I)._The minor is accompanied by his or her parent, • 2 guardian,•or other .adult,person having the care and • 3 custody of the minor.- - :••• 4 (2) The minor is going to, or coming from, a medical 5 . appointment .• 6 (3)• The minor has permission to leave campus for 7 lunch and has in his.: or her possession a valid, 8 . school-issued, off-campus permit. 9 - - 10 (d) Each violation of this section shall constitute a 11 separate offense and shall be an infraction unless the 12 minor requests that a petition be filed under Section 601 13 or 602 of the Welfare and Institutions Code. • 14 (d) - 15 (e) The minor shall be informed by the court that he 16 or she must be accompanied by a parent, guardian, or 17 other individual having control and custody over the 18 minor at the date of the hearing.The court shall have the 19 authority to subpoena the parent or guardian, if 20 necessary. Failure of a parent, guardian, or other 21 individual having control and custody over the minor to 22 be present at the hearing shall constitute contempt 23 pursuant to Section 213 of the Welfare and Institutions 24 Code. A warrant shall be issued in the event that the L41- 25 minor fails to appear as scheduled. 27 (I) Punishment for an offense under subdivision (a) 28 (b) of this section shall be as follows: 29 (1) For a first offense, any of the following: • 30 (A) A fine of fifty dollars ($50) or the punishment 31 listed in subparagraph (B), or both. 32 (B) A requirement of daily school attendance. 33 (C) Referral to the county school attendance review 34 board pursuant to Section 48263 ef the Education Cede. 35 (2) For a second offense, all of the following: 36 • (A) A fine of one hundred dollars ($100): 37 (B) Suspension, or the prospective suspension, of the • 38 minor's driving privilege for six months. 39 (C) A requirement of daily school attendance. • 98 . • • • - _-.AB 1151 =-4 .. . ._ 1 _:.. (D) Referral to-the county school attendance review 2 board pursuant to Section 48263 ef the 3 :. 4 (g) If, during the proceeding, the traffic hearing f 5. officer believes or has reason to believe that the parent is 6 unwilling to address the conduct of the minor, the traffic 7 hearing officer shall forward the case file to the district 8 attorney for review, consultation with the parent as J 9 appropriate,and evaluation of any evidence of a violation 10 of Section 272 of the Penal Code or Section 48293 ef the r 11 FAsitteatieri Code. . 12 (g) 13 (h) Therim Py purpose of this section is to remediate 9 - 14 problems of truancy employing punitive measures only to 15 assist in achieving a positive result. The court shall be 1 ` ' 16 authorized : and encouraged to consider additional 11 17 remedies that may help ensure that the truant b_e brought 18 back into the classroom, including referral to a local - I . • 19 school attendance review board or a community-based 20 organization that addresses truancy, delinquency, ,,,,i,-.,,, 21 parenting, or related domestic problems. . ' 22 Ih) Notwithstanding , ;, O thstanding any other provision of law, if a ' 24 city, county, or city and county has adopted a daytime T 25 curfew ordinance, truancy ordinance, or similar3 26 ordinancerovidin P g penalties for minors, their parents, • 27 or both if the minor is found unlawfully loitering or ` c,; 28 wandering during school hours as described in this 29 section, a peace officer, as defined iii Section 830.1 of the 30 Penal Code, or other person charged with enforcing a ; 3 31 curfew or truancy law or ordinance, may act pursuant to g ' 32 this.section or under the authority of any locally enacted 1 33 ordinance,at the officer's discretion.This section does not ii . . . 34 preempt any valid local curfew or truancy ordinance: L- SEC. 2. No reimbursement is required by this act if-• 36 pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California 37 Constitution because the only costs that may be incurred 38 by a local agency or school district will be incurred . t39 because this act creates a new crime or infraction, .4• . 40 eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty - t 98 - i� `r { -5— AB 1151 ' 1 for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 2 17556 of the Government Code,or changes the definition 3 of a crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article 4 XIII B of the California Constitution. 5 Notwithstanding Section 17580 of the Government 6 Code,unless otherwise specified,the provisions of this act 7 shall become operative on the same date that the act 8 takes effect pursuant to the California Constitution. 0 98 AB 1151 Page 1 Date of Hearing: April 22, 1997 Counsel: Dawn Kusumoto ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY Robert M. Hertzberg, Chair AB 1151 (Goldsmith) - As Prdposed to be Amended SUMMARY: Provides for a minor and his or her parent to be cited into court for truancy. Specifically, this bill: 1) Makes it an infraction for a minor to loiter, as specified, during regular school hours on days when school is in session. 2) Provides for an authorized individual to issue a citation to a minor for a violation as an alternative to arresting or assuming custody of a minor. 3) Allows for the issuing agency to withdraw the citation or for the court to dismiss or reschedule the hearing depending upon the validity of the parent' s explanation as to the legitimacy of the reason for the minor not being in school. 4) Provides for a violation to be heard by a traffic hearing officer for disposition. 5) Provides an affirmative defense to the infraction if the minor is as follows : a) Accompanied by a parent or like authority; or b) In transit to or from a medical appointment; or c) Has permission to leave campus for lunch and carries a valid, school-issued, off-campus permit; or d) If the minor is going to or coming from a compulsory alternative education program activity or without detour, or returning from a recreational activity sponsored by a compulsory public or alternative education program. EXISTING LAW authorizes a peace officer, a school administrator or his or her designee, the attendance supervisor or his or her designee, or a probation officer to arrest or assume temporary custody, during school hours, of any minor subject to compulsory, full-time education or compulsory continuation • education, as specified. (Education Code Section 48264. ) COMMENTS: 1) Author' s Statement. According to the author, "Over the last decade, California has seen a significant increase in the incidence of juvenile delinquency and juvenile crime rates. In California, comparisons between 1985 and 1994 show significant increases in both the number and rate of juvenile arrests for violent crimes- an 826- increase in the number and a 63E increase in the rate of arrests. Between 1989 and 1994, juvenile assault arrests increased 966-, from 6,366 to 12,481; juvenile robbery AB 1151 Page 2 arrests rose 750, from 5,100 to 8,947. The number of juvenile homicide- arrests rose from 236 in 1985 to 696 in 1991. "Often, these problems are caused by a parent' s unwillingness to take an active role in his or her child's life. Additionally, many parents believe that there is nothing they can do to make their child attend school when the child chooses otherwise. By providing school attendance review boards with greater teeth to secure a parent' s involvement in his or her child' s education, this proposal is intended to have beneficial impact upon juvenile dropout and delinquency rates. Additionally, numerous studies have shown a strong relationship between juvenile delinquency and juvenile crime rates. It is expected that getting more children to attend school would also have a beneficial impact upon daytime crime statistics commonly associated with juvenile delinquency. "This legislative proposal, put forth by the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention State Advisory Group, would specifically reference school attendance review boards (SARBs) within the failure to comply provisions of the Education Code by clarifying that SARBs have enforcement powers related to school attendance and parental responsibility. " 2) Truancy Problem. The United States Justice Department estimates that 8096- of people in prison started out as truants. According to the Manual to Combat Truancy (July 1996) , prepared by the United States Department of Education in cooperation with the United States Department of Justice, truancy is the first sign of trouble. The manual states, "Research data tells us that students who become truant and eventually drop out of school put themselves at a long-term disadvantage in becoming productive citizens. High school dropouts, for example, are two and a half times more likely to be on welfare than high school graduates. . . . Truancy is the gateway to crime. High crime rates of truancy are linked to high daytime burglary rates and high vandalism. According to the the Los Angeles County Office of Education, truancy is the most powerful predictor of juvenile delinquent behavior. . . . " 3) Solution. The Manual to Combat Truancy (Ibid. ) provides a user' s guide to deterring truancy that, in summary, recommends the following: a) Involve parents in all truancy prevention activities; b) Ensure that students face firm sanctions for truancy; c) Create meaningful incentives for parental responsibility; d) Establish ongoing truancy prevention programs in school; and e) Involve local law enforcement in truancy reduction efforts . 4) Other Localities . The author has provided substantial documentation attesting to the positive results netted from daytime curfew models adopted by various localities (e.g. , Milwaukee, Wisconsin; Oklahoma City, Oklahoma; and Norfolk, Virginia) . Not all of these localities employ the the imposition of infractions, but some issue citations. However, many jurisdictions approach the problem by targeting known truants instead of confronting all young people who appear to be of school age and could potentially be truant. AB 1151 Page 3 5) Application to California. Under current law, local municipalities may enact curfew ordinances. In addition, the police are authorized to stop persons they suspect are truant. Problems seem to be related to the implementation of the ordinance, not constitutional challenges of existing law. Presently, Rohnhert Park and Monrovia (both in California) have patrol officers who issue citations to suspected truants during school hours and return students to school. The Rohnhert Park project is cited in the United States Department of Education manual as decreasing the daytime burglary rate by 750 of what it was in 1979. However, the Monrovia program has generated many complaints and a threatened lawsuit. Parents, church groups, and attorneys representing minors and their parents have called, visited and provided documentation to this office regarding alleged harassment of children, particularly home schoolers, residing in the city of Monrovia. In summary, they state that there was little opposition to the initial enactment of the Monrovia daytime curfew. The opposition resulted from home schoolers, some of whom attended one class at the local school or church, or students attending a church-affiliated, private year-round school. These students complained of being continually stopped when walking from one destination to the other between the hours of 8 :30 a.m. and 1:30 p.m. Stops were stated to average around 20 minutes. It was stated that these students and public school students, with valid excuses for being out of school, were issued passes. Unfortunately, some students who reached for their orange police-issued passes when confronted by police officers have allegedly had the police point guns at them. Supposedly, the police were concerned that the student was reaching for a weapon. In response to the police-issued orange cards, Rabbi J.B. Sachs, the leader of Congregation Shaarei Torah states, in part, "As there is no synagogue in Monrovia, I serve many Monrovia families. . . . I am not sure what we gain by having police confront children who are doing nothing even remotely suspicious; who are merely in public. . . . The fact that children are still minors does not make them less people. The fact that their youthfulness makes them more vulnerable and less capable of having their voices and needs articulated, should place more of a burden on us, not them. " Dr. Ken Williams, Orange County Board of Education Member, points out that the Orange County Department of Education opposed daytime curfews after a careful review of the Monrovia program and examination of testimony offered by public officials from other Southern California school districts attesting to the ineffectiveness of daytime curfews. (Note: the Orange County Department of Education passed a special resolution memorializing their concern and opposition to daytime curfew. ) 6) Constitutionality. Several law firms, civil rights groups and attorneys for various religious groups have raised the issue of the constitutionality of this bill. The United States Supreme Court has affirmed the application of constitutional rights to minors. In the case of Planned Parenthood v. Danforth (1976) 428 U.S. 52, 74 (1976) , the Supreme Court stated, "Constitutional rights do not mature and come into being magically, only when one attains the state-defined age of majority. " AB 1151 Page 4 The Supreme Court expressly recognized the fundamental importance of a - citizen's right to move about at will when it stated, "The right to walk the streets, or to meet publicly with one's friends for a noble purpose or no purpose at all, and to do so when ever one pleases - is an integral component of life in a free society. " (Papachristou v. City of Jacksonville, (1972) 405 U.S. 156, 164. ) Courts have upheld curfew ordinances aimed at minors after determinating that the municipality had a compelling interest in restricting the juvenile activity for a narrow period of the day and after concluding that the ordinance was narrowly drawn in its application. Courts have upheld nighttime curfews in California in emergency situations such as riots or earthquakes. (See e.g. , In re Juan C. , (1994) 28 Cal.App.4th 1093 . ) • "Curfew statutes can be classified into two groups according to conduct proscribed, i.e. , 'presence' or ' loitering' [citation omitted] . Those proscribing 'presence' or 'being in' places have been held unconstitutional [citation omitted] . Those interpreted as only proscribing ' loitering' or 'remaining' have been held constitutional [citations omitted] . . . . Even those ordinances proscribing 'presence' may be reasonable if sufficient exceptions are included making it clear that mere 'presence' alone is not proscribed [citation omitted] . The rationale in those cases holding that they are unnecessarily broad [citation omitted] . . . . It is well settled, however, that juveniles may be reasonably classified differently from adults. . . . " In re Nancy C. , (1972) 28 Ca1.App.3d 747. Nancy C. goes on to state that curfews or loitering statutes aimed at juveniles are not unconstitutional per se, provided the statutes are carefully drafted to include "reasonable and comprehensible exceptions" . Thus, it would appear that daytime curfews are not unconstitutional if properly drafted. The current bill appears to meet constitutional standards on its face. However, if the opponents of this bill are accurately criticizing current law and if the proposed bill is enforced in the same manner as current law, then the bill would be unconstitutional in its application. If current law is being discriminately applied to target all children on the street and to include children merely in legal transit from one location to another, then should the law be expanded? Will it then create further harm through the issuance of citations? 7) Other Issues and Author's Amendments. This bill was put over from last week' s Public Safety Committee hearing to address some of the concerns raised during the hearing. The author has proposed the following amendments: a) Definition of Loitering. "Loiter" means to delay, to linger, or to idle about a public place during regular school hours without a valid excuse for being absent from school. b) Affirmative Defenses. See "this bill" #5. c) Withdrawal of Citation or Court Dismissal. See "this bill #3 . REGISTERED SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: Support AB 1151 Page 5 California District Attorney' s Association California State Sheriff's Association Calaveras County Sheriff's Department Los Angeles County Probation Department Union Sacramento County Deputy Sheriff's Association City of Buena Park Police Department Opposition American Civil Liberties Union • California Attorneys for Criminal Justice California Child, Youth and Family Coalition California Public Defender' s Association Californians for Juvenile Justice Reform Capitol Resource Institute Calvary Road Baptist Church & Academy Church of State Council Citizens for Responsible and Constitutional Laws "Working to Keep Daytime Curfews Out of Orange County" Concerned Citizens for Constitutional Laws Concerned Parents Against Daytime Curfew Governing Board of the Orange County Department of Education Home School Legal Defense Fund Private/Home Educators of California Association of Christian Schools International Eagle Forum of California Tim Carroll, Mayor of City of Cypress Law Office of David Llewellyn Law Offices of Lurie and Zepeda 9 Private Citizens Analysis prepared by: Dawn Kusumoto / apubs / (916) 445-3268 • Draft Amendments for AB 1151 (Goldsmith) (1) On page 2,line 24, add the following: "For the purposes of this section"Loiter"means to delay,to linger, or to idle about a public place during regular school hours without a valid excuse for being absent from school." (2) On page 3,line 9, add the following: "(4) When the juvenile is going to or coming from a compulsory alternative education program activity or without detour going to, or returning from a recreational activity sponsored by a compulsory public or compulsory alternative education program." (3) On page 3,line 14, add the following: "If a juvenile is cited pursuant to the requirements of this section and the parent can substantiate that the juvenile was not required to be in school or that the juvenile had a valid reason for not.being•in school,,the parent may contact the court or the issuing agency for a determination. • Upon receiving such notification,the issuing agency may withdraw the citation, or the - court may dismiss or reschedule the hearing depending upon the validity of the parent's explanation."