They really should have moved this item up on the agenda. They didn’t get to it until after 10:00 . . . and many of the young people there to speak had gone home to do homework. However, instead of making the curfew stricter, they ended up loosening up the rules and making exceptions to the current ordinance.
Alder Bruer moved adoption of the curfew ordinance “for purposes of discussion”. That’s usually code for “I’m not voting for it, but I’m making the motion to get it on the table and allow the discussion.
PUBLIC COMMENT
There are 20 people registered. Mayor reminds people they have 3 minutes. (Several people have been going over their time tonight.)
Schumacher brings up the irony of getting to this so late. Tries to make a joke, but not everyone thought it was funny.
Bill Patterson – Talks about work in South Madison and reminds the Council that we all talk about how great Madison is, but we forget not everyone feels that way. He talks about how people in low income neighborhoods migh have a different view of how great Madison is for them. Some might call this ordinance racial profiling. He reminds people that kids are dropping out of school. He says that there are economic effects of kids not getting education and that impact is bigger than the current recession. He says we aren’t fixing the basic problems in the communities, police can’t solve the problems alone. He says we might need police, but we aren’t addressing the underlying issues. He tells the council about a Children Defense Fund report – Cradle to Prison pipeline. He says the people who did the report would consider this ordinance something that aids in that process. He talks about the Dane County Task Force on Racial Disparities in the Criminal Justice System. He says that in Dane County the number of non-white to white people arrested is 21 to 1. He reminds people that once someone has been in in prison hard it is hard to get a jobs. He says that he has learned from his work with young people you really need to reach them one on one. Need to address the basics of poverty.
The next person called has already gone home.
Rosemary Lee spoke in opposition. She says she sent an email to council members. She is worried about programs not sponsored by the schools not being exempted. Agrees that it will lead to more racial profiling.
Ed, a younger adult, agrees with Schumachers joke. He tells the council that they are debating something tonight that half the peope in the audience won’t be able to be in the building if it passes. He says he went to the Council session last week and one thing that struck him was that the fact based approach was discussed, but with a fact based appeal there is no need to change the ordinance. He says the police said that they enforce curfew on a common sense basis. When they see someone walking down the street they deal with it on a case by case basis. He says that highlights his juvenile memory – when he heard that he just wanted to shout and cause a scene but he didn’t because I’m an adult now. He says when he was young enough to be impacted by this ordinance he would have gotten himself in trouble. He says the kids are not alright. He says he knows that the Council is concerned about this, but he says the kids are never alright and it’s the natural condition of youth to not be alright. He asks the council to not do more to set the police at odds with youth. Please remember what that is like to be young.
Bert Zipperer – Clarified that he was partially speaking for EOC, and partially as an individual. He said EOC had a public hearing, that they strongly unanimously opposed the ordinance. He said that age is not a crime, action is.
Speaking for himself – he feels that we ahve a problem in the City with disproproptionate racial problems. He says we’re in a big hole, we can start now. He says that there were youth in the room tonight and the council sent a serious message – they had to go home cuz had school work but really wanted to be here. He said they saw swine flu get moved up, but not their issue. He also said that they wanted to engage with you and talk to you and they didn’t get that opportunity. He urged us to work on this together and said that criminalizing another hour of the youth’s time – for people who might not have a basement with an xbox was unfair. He urged them to do away with extra hour and get to the real issue affecting youth.
2nd person who went home was called.
Andrew (Bange?) – Dane County Youth Baord – He’s and 18 year old home schooled high school senior who won’t be affected, but this will affect his 15 year old little borther. He asked that when issues of youth are discussed, that they could please talk about it earlier and he noted several people went home. He said what strikes him most is that it is disrespectful to the youth. He said trust breeds trust. He said if you treat us like criminals we’ll act like criminals, its human nature. He pointed out that there are only a few youth commiting crimes and you have laws to deal with them, you don’t need a blanket law criminalizing many youth.
Greg (Bange?) – He spoke briefly and said he was worried about the law of unintended consequences. He told the council that as a parent, he just wanted to right to parent his kids the way he say fit and he thinks this law infringes on that.
(Erika Fox?) – She is a senior at Shabazz. She says that as a citizen she wants her tax dollars well spent, including police force. She said she feels a lot safer knowing that police force is spending time on real criminals, not people her age being outside. She says its not a pervasive problem, that there were only 125 tickets per year. She said an extra hour is just more time to write more tickets – that this new law breeds new criminals. She said if people are commiting crines or drinking or vandalizing, are they really going to stop when the curfew comes up. She said that this makes criminals of people who are outside not creating problems. She says the kids are not all right.
3rd person called who went home.
4th person called who went home.
5th person called who went home.
6th person called who ent home.
County Board Supervisor Matt Veldran speaks. Tries to make some jokes, there’s some banter between him and council members about how its good to keep a County Board Supervisor waiting, unless their pregnant (Supervisor Carousel Bayrd was also there but went home.) and he urged them to be nice to staff (his wife is staff to the Common Council). Once that was all over . . . He said he would have preferred that the kids had been able to speak. He pointed out the irony of discussing this at 10:30 and that those who are affected are not here. He pointed out the letter from youth commission opposing. He said he doesn’t disagree with with why they want the ordinance, for safer neighborhoods and he understands the frustrations of the community – but this isn’t the correct means. He points out that there are a variety of reasons to be out and none of them are bad. He talks about youth who ride the bus and walk home and those who don’t have the luxury of geting a ride in a car. He says the youth board tried to create a standard in Dane County . . . time had to be extended for him . . . He said that he has two middle school kids and he has concerns about the amendment about the two age categories and how that will be enforced. He’s concerned about the message this is sending and he urged them to vote no.
7th person went home.
Eric Gunther – from the ACLU. Pointed out that even tho he has a tie, he wasn’t from the liquor industry (referring to all the guys in ties there for the alcohol discussion). He’s the president of the ACLU board representing 9,000 Wisconsites and the student alliances. They oppose curfew across the board. He says that laws should have association with wrongful conduct. He also points out that if convicted it makes it hard on applications for schools and jobs. If they ask you if you have you ever been convicted of a crime, you can say no. If they ask if you have been convicted of anything other than traffic violation, then the answer is yes. He points out that kids can’t go to a late movie, attend a council meeting that goes late, or have their [ick] 4th meal at Taco Bell. He says the police have all the tools they need. There are ordinances on the books for disorderly conduct, smoking, alcohol, noise, aggressive panhanding, lighting a sparkler in a park, throwing stones, etc. He says that this ordinance is walking a constitutional tightrope and that it is more strict than some that have been struck down in other states and even in Wisconsin. He says that we have a choice between Rockwell and Orwell. We can have the nice painting of a kids with an icecream cone being helped by a police officer (Rockwell) or we can have the 1984 Orwell version of the perception of police where power is arbitrary. He doesn’t want to indoctrinate youth at a young age that police are not someone to turn to when they witness a crime or are a victim of a sexual assualt. Part way through, he also went over his time – the Mayor didn’t even wait for someeone to make a motion to give him more time – he just say “yah, yah, keep going” – apparently giving up on limiting people from saying what they came there to say.
Paul Terranova said it was past his bedtime, but he’s the father of two boys and uncle. The kids participate in soccer, drama & violin. He points out that many activities might not be organized by the school. He said that an ordinance that is not enforced across the board without ridiculous results should not be passed. He said kids should not be harassed or be afraid of being seen by a police officer. He said if its enforced selectively – then it will result in even more problem for people of color. There were audible sighs from some alders and he acknowledged their reaction and then went on to say that white kids don’t get police called. He says this isn’t going to solve the real challenges. He asked what is the city’s approach to idisconnected youth. He asked if the city is going to push them away or engage with them. He talked about the Dane Count Youth Resource Network – people who work with these kids and noted that they were also against the ordinance. He acknowledged that police are often expected to do more than they should be expected to do. He pointed out that youth workers follow kids year after year – know kids at 2nd grade and 8th grade and high school and these are the folks that are advocating for the kids in court and to help them get jobs and they know the kids well and asked the council to listen to the advice of these workers.
13 others in registered in opposition not wishing to speak
QUESTIONS OF STAFF
They said the motion wasn’t clear, so they made another motion to adopt – even tho Bruer already did that.
Solomon asked questions of the police chief. He apologizes for not being at the WEdnesday briefing (that was called very late so alders couldn’t attend). He asks, at a high level, what does this ordinance address? Chief says this was proposed and discussed by officers in the field and they see it as a solution to quality of life issues. He says its a question of community standards. If the council believes 10:00 is time for neighborhood to settle down, then they should support the ordinance, especially if they think it is a problem to have unsupervised kids out at 10:00. If you think that is ok that they are out until 11:00 then don’t support the ordinance.
Solomon asks questions about the problems that occur with youth (noise, etc) and how they are handled before curfew. Chief says that neighbors can still call the police and the police can still address the situation. However, he says its slightly different with curfew ordinance. At the earlier times they would just ask them to be quiet, but the same activities later (playing tag) might get a different response because of the hour of the disturbance.
Solomon asks about what happens to kids now? Chief says there are about 125 tickets. He says the department is exercising excellent discretion now. [Maybe they should ask someone other than the Chief?] The Chief talks about racial profiling and says that they don’t need that extra hour to do racial profiling. He says that if an officier is going to engage in biased policing they can do it now. He says that racial profiling happens when exercising discretion. [OK – WAIT A MINUTE – first he says they are exercising excellent discretion and then he says that is when racial profiling happens. I wish someone would have asked about that!] He says that 72% of the tickets were for were secondary offenses, that they were originally called to the scene for other reasons. [OK, WAIT A MINUTE – if they are called for other reasons 72% of the time, why do they need an ordinance at all?] The Chief then talks about disparate impact and says that this is an issue that needs full and undivided attention form the council, but we already have it so we should discuss it just in the context of the curfew ordinance. [My head nearly exploding now. It’s so hard to listen to that crap.]
Solomon asks when the 125 tickets are issued. Chief says most tickets are issues between midnight and 1 am and 2 am to 4 am. He said between 11:00 and midnight there were only 18 citations. He has a chart but its hard to see because he’s in the back of the room. He points out that the shift change is at 10:00 and they don’t anticipate many tickets being written between 10:00 and 11:00 if the ordinance is changed because they typically only answer emergency and priority calls. He says they’ll use the 10 – 11 time period to give warnings to kids to start settling down and that it is a community standard issue and that they will still do what they need to do to quiet down the neighborhood with or without the curfew ordinance change.
Solomon says won’t put words in Chief’s mouth (Chief says “if they’re good I’ll take them) but he talks about band aids and he sees this as one. He asks if there are other tools that would better equip the police to deal with these issues. Chief says they were asked to back away from this ordinance change but they decided to keep moving forward because officers say there is a problem with disconnected and unsupervised youth. He says while they can give a ticket to the parents now, officers don’t want to take the time to find the parents and ticket them and they only gave 3 to parents last year. He notes that there is a disparate and disproportionate impact in low income communities and he thinks we should “take teen court to scale” and have the best teen court in the country. He says they’d like to have a process where the 1st arrest for curfew could be held open instead of convicting and then work with the parent.
Sanborn asks if the ordinance is intended to ticket the kids that is jogging at night or getting milk. Chief says that is not what this is about. Sanborn says it would be nice to craft the perfect ordinance but we rely on polie discretion. Chief says officers don’t like enforcing curfew, its labor intensive and not something they like engaging in. Typially they only enforce it on the outlier, the kid who sticks out gets the ticket. [Making my blood boil again.]
Sanborn says we already have tools to address the behavior and asks if this is a way to have cops give a ticket when they can’t get the kids on the underlying behaviors. Chief says yes, this is a tool to do that. [Holy crap – did he really say that?]
Compton asks how many officers did you have to discipline for racial discrimination. Chief hems and haws and looks thoughtful. At first he says “not many”. Then he says he “doesn’t recall”. Then he says that there was nothing specific but some were for a “related issue”. [I wish I knew what the real answer was there!]
Maniaci asks if they have data on where kids are from that are given these tickets. He says they mapped it and didn’t find trends. Says people can look at the one map they have, but then doesn’t pass it around. Hands it to one of his officers instead. She asks how the UW police and other depeartments handle curfew since lots of kids come to UW events. Chief says he can’t comment on it. He thinks they are addressing it in the same way. Says we need a universal time in Dane County but we don’t have that. She asks if tickets were for Madison residents residents and Chief says he doesn’t have that info.
DISCUSSION
Pham-Remmele – hopes the Council members will have an open mind. She’s sorry Matt Veldran went home, (its 11:10 now). She says as a parent, educator and community members, when we bring up racial profiling, we are more enlightened and we don’t need ot go back to the sixties . . . please accept people by behaviors not colors – race issues kept poeple from doing their job. [Yikes she’s saying alot in unconnected sentences that I’m afraid I don’t clearly understand.] She says that a kid is a colored kid and so the teachers don’t do their job because they are a person of color – colored kids not being held to the same standards as others so they are being short changed. She says every child has a mother, the father may be unknown, but every child has a mother – and there is a saying that when your daughter is at home under the roof, you feel peace – but when child is out at all hours something is wrong. [OK – so these phrases aren’t connecting in a meaningful way for me, but this is what she is saying in the order she is saying it. And I don’t think I understand what she is saying enought to type it any better.] She says she is 61 years old – why are kids so difficult – shouldn’t you feel good that someone is worried about you. She says kids might not like people looking out for you. Tells story of crossing street with mother and at age 50 her mom yanked her arm cuz car coming. She says that when students come here and say that we don’t trust them – she says she trusts the kids, just not the dark side [that is what she said] of the community. She talked about Milt McPike and how he said that its up to the kids to make decisions about if they show up. She talked about marking a kid absent if they don’t respond after three attempts to call roll, even if they are in the room. She asks to please look at the real problem. She says she is not trying to harass kids or take away freedom, but certain activities require certain maturity such as voting, consensual sex, etc. She asks why the council is so reluctant to say that they should be inside at 10 or 11. She says its not about the the noise, or disturbance, it’s the future of the community. Then she talked about how Walgreens won’t go afte the shoplifers to protect employees. She said it is always harder to say no than yes. Share the responsibility – years from now looking back . . . [I don’t know . . . I got lost . . .]
Bidar-Sielaff is in opposition. She said trust breed trust, respect breed respect. She apologizes to youth that came here to speak. She says the ordinance is arbitrary and that there is no reason to have curfew at 10:00 instead of 11:00. She says we should listen to the youth and we failed tonight. She said if people in the alcohol industry deserve respect, so do the workers who work with the youth. She said the discussion last week was productive and would like to work on other solutions to get youth to participate in good acitivities. She suggests some youth might like to get together with friends and watch a council meeting til 2:00 while eating popcorn. She said we need to listen to and support the youth.
Rhodes-Conway said we shoudl not criminalize a time period or age. She noted that they started the meeting by honoring the basketball team and they were likely out after hours and that those types of activities are the kinds we want to encourage even when they are not associated with the schools.
Rummel echos Rhodes-Conway about not criminalizing a time period or age. And notes that if this is about community standards, she hasn’t had anyone contact her about it being changed.
Compton was going to support the change because the areas around her district all have curfew at 10:00. She talked about the anti-loitering ordinance. Then she said the issue has nothing to do with color or poverty. She said she doesn’t have any sympathy for the parents who have issues, but she does for the kids. She said she felt chastised by Bert Zipperer. She talked about seniors in her area that have been threatened by kids and the kids respond by asking “what are you going to do, call the police”. She asks if these are the kids you are protecting? And she says “no they aren’t’. She says police arrest people based on behavior and we need to stop emphasizing differences and we “need to love people for who they are”. She said we should look out for the best interests of the kids. She said she came in supporting the changes, but changed her mind after talking to the chief, Bill Clingan and Shiva Bidar-Sielaff. [I have no idea where she ended up!]
Sanborn – uncomfortable looking for new laws – partents not doing responsibility – 13 year olds have consititutional rights – that’s not the issues – probalbme sin wooedman’s parking lot – yes we do criminalize time and age (drivers licenses and bar time) wants consistencey – in response to the joke its 11:30 and we already have a curfew and that probel would not have been avoaided – racial profiling should not be thrown around lightly – Should kids 15 and younger be out a 10 without a purpose – if a 14 year old wants to meet firend ot watch council meeting – they aren’t going to get a ticket – it’s a decent tool and should do it – have faith in police and not going to catch kids odin tpositive activies –
Eagon said that as a young person he could give the council plenty of anecdotes. He said that on the last issue that were looking at alcohol is the root of the problem and here they are looking at the youth as being the problem. He said that the youth are not the problem. He was concerned about why the council should be defining what is a good or bad purpose to be out at night. He said that 75% of citation are secondary to other activities and the ordinance doesn’t seem necessary or beneficial. He said it creates more problems with already strained relationshiop between youth and police. Doesn’t see this as beneficial looking at either the data or anecdotes.
SOLOMON MOVES TO REPEAL ORDINANCE ENTIRELY
Solomon – sees why people might think it is helpful. Keeps coming back to an hour change but is bothered by the entire idea. He says that they are taking something bad and making it worse. He moved an amended substitute – to repeal the ordinance entirely. Kerr or Bidar-Sielaff seconded it. He asked if the police will not enforce or cite certain cases – why do it at all. [I think I missed a little bit here, as I was still in shock from his motion.] He said this is a band-aid. He also said it was discriminatory. He said that “we’re attacking people for being young.” He asked if we really think the ordinance as it exists now or as it is changed stops anyone from doing anything? He said 40 municipalities in Dane County don’t have an ordinance and this puts the City in sync with them. He said that we should get to the behavior that is criminal and he supports those tools to do that. He doesn’t want kids to threaten seniors at 4 am or 4 pm. He then points out that the Who said “The kids are alright”. He asks that they not ignore the real problems. Then, somewhat sheepishly, apologizes for dorpping that amendment on them at 11:45 at night!
Many people in the room start clapping. Mayor pounds the gavel and asks for some decorum.
Clear doesn’t support the motion.
Palm echos Clear . . . talks for a long time but I stepped out of the room, several minutes later I came back and he was still talking . . . he said he was going to vote against the change but he’s not willing to wipe out the entire ordinance. However, he said it should seriously be discussed. He wants us to trust our kids, family structure and schools. He wants us to see that youth can postively contribute and not set them up for failure. Then he moves to refer the whole item after some questions about if he could move to refer the substitute. He then withdraws and says Schumacher is going to fix it.
SCHUMACHER SOLUTION
Schumacher doesn’t support Solomon or the original change. He moves another substitute. His motion goes back to the 11:00 time period and makes an exeption for work and school activities and then adds community and faith based group activities.
Maniaci likes the substitute and supports repeal but says repeal requires more consideration. Says her constituents don’t support the proposal.
Schmidt does alot of talking to say he doesn’t want to talk. It’s getting late and they’re getting punchy.
Compton supports the substitute. Talking about tools and loitering ordinances and maybe I’m starting to lose it, but I don’t know what she said. She says don’t repeal the law.
King supports Schumacher version. Says he speaks for silent majority that thinks taht 10:00 is the quiet hour. We close our parks at 10:00. Say PSRB wouldn’t support repeal. Says youth groups deserve to be heard and should have listened to them earlier in the night.
Rhodes Conway asks about exceptions – May there are none in the current version. Says the ordinance goes back to 1969 and that at the time it had a companion ordinance that people under 18 can’t play pool. Rhodes-Conway says she supports making exceptions.
Clausius says it should be uniform.
(I missed some comments – I think it was Schmidt and some Solomon)
Brian continues to fight for repeal. Says we’re polishing a turd – we’re making exceptions so we don’t punish people who aren’t doing anything wrong. He talks about 6 kids who do something wrong, but 20 kids are standing around, will they all get tickets because some did something wrong?
Kerr sticking with Brian. Doesn’t support curfew ordinances in general.
Sanborn – tells people how to vote (smart!) repealing curfew deserves some discussion in the community. And it talks about how police exercise discretion by not arresting someone for going 56 in a 55 mile per hour zone.
Passes on a voice vote. They voted to make the substitute the main motion, but never actually voted on the main motion, but everyone assumes that the ordinance is passed. The audible “nos” were Solomon and Kerr, but I think there were several others.
