RSSYakima City Council kills proposed curfew ordinance
YAKIMA HERALD-REPUBLIC
E-mail
Print
Comments
More 'Local'
- Trails a tangible part of quality of life
- Forum takes hard look at keeping kids out of gangs
- How well did you read the YH-R last week?
- Road work will slow Valley Mall Blvd. traffic
- State to look anew at mosquito control rules
- Yard sale has class written all over it
- Transplanting history in Grandview
YAKIMA, Wash. -- In a surprise move, the Yakima City Council killed a proposed curfew ordinance this morning.
Councilman Micah Cawley said the council voted not to move forward with an ordinance after police Chief Sam Granato said crime data didn’t justify one.
Last month, the council asked staff to explore a juvenile curfew modeled after a similar ordinance in Tacoma that has never been challenged in court.
The city has had a curfew ordinance on the books since 1994, but stopped enforcing it after the Supreme Court struck down a similar law in the Tacoma suburb of Sumner on the grounds it was unconstitutionally vague and not tailored narrowly enough.
During a meeting this morning at City Hall, Granato and Assistant City Attorney Cynthia Martinez said they doubted an ordinance would be an effective deterrent against gangs and graffiti.
Granato said an analysis of crime data — a key requirement by the courts for an ordinance to pass constitutional muster — did not justify a curfew.
“The data shows that the majority of juvenile felony arrests are from 2 to 8 p.m.,” he said.
He said the ordinance had other problems as well. Curfew violations are status offenses, and violators cannot be locked up. In addition, the high court’s Sumner decision made it clear that a civil rights violation could be heavily punished in a lawsuit.
“If we could get it done without getting our pants sued off, I’m all for it,” Granato said. “But we’re not baby sitters, and we’re not a taxi service.”
Cawley said he voted against tabling a proposed ordinance and would have preferred to keep crafting something that would pass constitutional muster.
“At some point, we’ve got to say enough is enough,” Cawley said. “We the people run this government, not the courts, not activist judges. It’s very frustrating.”
I saw the meeting. He said he would support a curfew but wanted one that would not get him or his officers sued.
The statistics did ot back up a curfew that could be defended and there is no place to take them if it could be defended.
The people need to get rid of the supreme court justices that made this decision or change the law.
So because the curfew is not targeting the times of the "majority" of felony arrests it shouldn't be further considered? I think regardless it would be of assistance and beneficial to Yakima. So the needed resources to make this successful aren't already in place so there are worries of the police being taxis and baby sitters. Fine, get the assistance needed in place and ready to implement it prior to enacting it don't just roll over and give up. Be part of the solution, not part of the problem. Don't get discouraged if the fix isn't a perfect fit, keep working on it.
Report Violation
Posting Guidelines - Updated Aug. 21 2009
Readers are encouraged to use these forums to discuss issues affecting the
Yakima Valley. Debate the ideas presented in stories and other comments, but
refrain from personal attacks and offensive remarks aimed at others; e.g.,
you may call an idea idiotic, but don't say the person is an idiot. The
Herald-Republic reserves the right to remove any comment for any reason.
Examples include material that is obscene, encourages illegal activity or
stereotypes based on race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs and
other factors. Continued violation of these guidelines can lead to
suspension or revocation of your ability to post comments. If you believe a
comment is inappropriate, you can bring it to our attention by clicking the
"report violation" link by each comment. Guidelines revised Aug. 21, 2009.
Registered User?
