HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-05-26 - AGENDA REPORTS - PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY (2)UNFINISHED BUSINESS
DATE: May 26, 1998
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager Approval
Item to be presented b : Adele Macpherson
SUBJECT: PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY MEASURE: UPDATE
DEPARTMENT: Parks, Recreation & Community Services
RECOMMENDATION
City Council accepts report for informational purposes only.
BACKGROUND
At the request of both the City Council and residents,. staff,:has spent the last year researching
the merits of a conceptual Parental Responsibility Ordinance for the City. For reasons that will
be explained within the context of this report, at this time staff does not recommend further
City Council consideration of this conceptual ordinance
PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY ORDINANCE: OVERVIEW
The first draft of this proposed ordinance was presented to the City Council in July of 1997. At
that time, it was envisioned that the enforcement of this type of ordinance would be addressed
as a "criminal matter," and that any potential citation would be issued specifically to the parent
or guardian of a juvenile. While the term "criminal matter" conjures up a strong image, it is
important to note that any criminal citation issued in connection with this type of ordinance
would be considered an "infraction" and similar to receiving a normal traffic ticket.
In summary, as discussed by staff at the City Council's July 1997 Study Session, the process to
enforce a Parental Responsibility type ordinance can best is described as "tiered." As discussed
at the July 1997 Study Session, an individual impacted by this conceptual ordinance would first
receive a "Notification Letter" informing them of their child's action, the existence of a parenting
ordinance, and an opportunity to voluntarily take advantage of existing "family oriented"
programs. Only after their child's second contact with Sheriff's Deputies, could the actions
prescribed by this potential ordinance (mandatory attendance in a family oriented program) be
imposed, and only after a third contact with Sheriff's Deputies would a monetary fine even be
considered.
In staff's opinion, one of the most important distinctions concerning the format of this
conceptual ordinance (as it was described to the City Council in July 1997) was the method of
enforcement. By developing an ordinance that was criminal in nature, the Sheriff's Department
and District Attorney's Office would have shared responsibility for its enforcement. However,
at the suggestion of the City Attorney, following the July 1997 Study Session, staff chose to
Agenda l
--
Parental Responsibility Measure: Update
May 26, 1998'
Page 2
modify this conceptual ordinance and incorporate language that would cause potential violations
to be considered "civil" in nature. The significance of this action would make it incumbent upon
the City (specifically, City staff) to pursue any potential violation as a civil matter.
CIVIL CITATIONS
The suggestion to incorporate civil fines, as opposed to criminal fines, came about for two
specific reasons. First, as a matter of law, the City would need only to demonstrate that a
"preponderance" of evidence (as opposed to "beyond a reasonable doubt") existed to potentially
succeed in a court of law. Second, the incorporation of civil citations would provide the City with
a greater level of protection against a possible legal challenge to the ordinance. However,
beyond these two factors, in staff's opinion this type of approach presented challenges that
outweighed the overall benefit.
First, in terms of staff time, the enactment of a Parental Responsibility Ordinance incorporating
civil fines would place modest impacts upon current City resources. However, even more
importantly than the potential level of City resources required to administer this program, staff
believes the adoption of this type of ordinance creates a situation where the City is "playing both
sides of the fence." Specifically, if adopted as a civil ordinance, this ordinance could create a
situation where City staff could in one breath be encouraging a parent to take advantage of a
program that benefits their entire family, and in the next breath be issuing a civil citation to
that same individual.
EXISTING YOUTHlFAMILY RESOUCRES & LAWS
The City's Community Services Division directly oversees, or participates in over 35 projects and
programs that provide supportive resources for our youth -population, their parents, and the
family as a whole. These programs range from the Anti -Gang Task Force, to the Mayor's
Conference on Youth and Family, to the "We Care For Youth" Program, and the newly created
"Action" Program. While these programs vary in approach, consistently each program strives
to achieve its goals by creating a positive environment that success can be built upon.
Lastly, the recent adoption (January 1998) of new "Procedures for the Citation of Non -Detained
Minors" by the Juvenile Division of the Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office,
dramatically reduces Santa Clarita's need for a Parental:Responsibility Ordinance. Among the
new procedures enacted, this law requires the setting of time limits to remedysituations among
agencies (including law enforcement, probation, the DA's. Office and Juvenile Court) involved
in juvenile criminal matters. Further, this new law also. mandates that a separate citation be
issued to the parent of a minor to appear in the same court as their child.
At this time staff is recommending against the further consideration of a Parental Responsibility
Ordinance, opting instead to take advantage of existing City programs and the new legal
procedures developed by the Juvenile Division of the Los Angeles County District Attorney's
Office.
i
Parental Responsibility Measure: Update
May 26, 1998
Page 3
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
1. Further City Council consideration of the proposed Parental Responsibility Ordinance
2. Other actions as determined by Council.
FISCAL IMPACT
None
ATTACHMENTS
The July 1997 City Council Study Session Item relating to the proposed Parental Responsibility
Ordinance is available for review in the City Clerk Reading File.
hAparnt526.doc
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Smyth and the City Council
FROM: George A. Caravalho, City Manager
DATE: July 1, 1997
SUBJECT: PROPOSED PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY ORDINANCE: OVERVIEW
BACKGROUND
The enactment of legislation that holds parents or guardians responsible for the actions of their minor
children is a relatively new concept. In response to a specific concern in their community, in January
of 1995 the City of Silverton, Oregon adopted one of the Country's first "Parental Responsibility"
-Ordinances'. A community of approximately 6,500 residents, the. City of Silverton choose to pursue
the development of a parental responsibility ordinance to address the issue of teen smoking, a
violation of Oregon state law.
In the time that has passed since the adoption of Silverton's ordinance, many other cities throughout. .
the United States have embarked on a similar course.' In addition.to the City of Silverton, parental
responsibility type legislation has been adopted in the communities of St. Clair Shores (Michigan),
Chicago, Detroit, Salt Lake City, and Memphis.
The enactment of this type of legislation has shown some positive results. Following the adoption
of Silverton's ordinance, the City experienced a 3.9% decrease in juvenile arrests 4n. 1995, as
compared to statistics from 1994. During the same period, arrests. of minors violating local and state
tobacco laws increased from three (3) arrests in 1994, to 40 arrests in 1995.
Through June 1996, twenty-two (22) parents/individuals have been cited by Silverton law
enforcement officials. Of these twenty-two (22) separate cases: six (6) cases were dismissed; two
(2) cases resulted in "not guilty" verdicts; and eight (8) cases resulted in guilty verdicts. As of March
1997, the remaining six (6) cases were either continued or pending court trial. Of the eight (8) cases
that resulted in a verdict of guilty: four (4) "defendants" completed parenting classes, while the other
four (4) paid a court imposed fine. To date, the City has only experienced two cases that involved
repeat offenders.
COMMUNYI'Y OUTREACH/EDUCATION EFFORT
Consistent with the City of Santa Clarita's approach toward public participation, staff conducted an
extensive "Community Outreach/Education Program'.' during the development of this proposed.
ordinance. The adoption of a Parental Responsibility Ordinance has the potential to impact any
person who is a parent in our community. In light of this fact, staff felt. that the first and most
important question to ask residents was: "Is'it the City's place to confiides admin2 an„ordinance that
tells parents' -how to raise their children?.
AsId
n IMPINN
-L
While the above question is somewhat overstated, staff believed it was extremely important to
determine if there was community support for this endeavor. In order to adequately answer the
question, staff coordinated a three month long outreach program that provided residents with every
possible opportunity to voice their support, opposition, questions and concerns.
During the months of March, April and May 1997, conducted a community outreach program that
included:
A mail -out to over 100 clubs, groups and organizations in the City. This mail -out included
a copy of the proposed ordinance; and a letter indicating that City staff would be happy to
come. to one of their future meetings to discuss the proposed ordinance
Heavily advertised community meetings that were facilitated at each of the City's four high
schools
Numerous presentations to the City's Anti -Gang Task Force; and the Sheriff's Community
Advisory Committee
A presentations at the' Hart School District's Monthly Administrative Meeting. This meeting
includes principals from each of the District's junior high, and high schools.
A presentation at the Monthly Hart School District Parents Meeting. This monthly meeting
includes members from each school's Parent Advisory Committee, and includes student
representatives from each school in the Hart District
A presentation to the Youth Alliance "Parenting Sub -Committee"
Numerous articles in. each of the local community newspapers.,
Follow-up letters to all residents who.attended one of these specific community meetings
While residents expressed, minor concerns that focused for. the. most part on enforcement of.the
proposed ordinance, there. was unanimous support (among every resident that staff came into contact
With as a result of this outreach program) for the concept of making parents more responsible for
thein children.' Overall, staff received very positive comments from City residents, as well as
numerous suggestions on how-to improve the initial draft of this ordinance. Staff was able to
incorporate many of these, suggestions into the final draft that has been submitted to City Council.
The majority of the concerns expressed by residents did not focus on the'actual ordinance, but upon .
the, "Law Enforcement" and "Judicial" processes for implementing and interpreting this ordinance.
Specifically, residents were concerned with issues such as:
The Judicial System provides too many chances to individuals .that appear before them, that
we are not tough enough
The District Attorney could not adequately support the.enforcement of this ordinance
There should be no type of monetary fines, or that fines should not exceed $100.00
That considerations should be made for divorced parents who have joint custody (parents
who have their children every other week/weekend)
That consideration should be made for children who are out of control, and no longer
"reachable"
PROPOSED ENFORCEMENT OF THE PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY ORDINANCE
By working in a collaborative fashion with local community groups, agencies, and residents, City staff
has developed a proposed Parental Responsibility Ordinance for the City Council's consideration.
This,proposed ordinance has been designed in a way that places an emphasis on connecting parents
with local resource agencies (and programs) that specialize in providing supportive services for the
entire family unit. The imposition of punitive or monetary penalties are considered efforts of last
resort, and Could only be considered after initial efforts to provide.non-punitive services for parents.
have failed.
The following information is meant to provide the City Council with an overview of the proposed
Parental Responsibility Ordinance:
Under proposed Ordinance 97-3, the parents or guardian of a' minor(s) who in cited for violation of
any of the following provisions of the Santa Clarita Municipal Code, could be charged with the
offense of Failing to Supervise a Minor. These provisions include:
A. Section. 11. 18.010 - Drinking in Public
B. Section 11.56.015 - Curfew Restrictions for Minors
C. Section 11.57.010 - Truancy Restrictions for Minors
D. Section 11.68.031 - Declaration of Graffiti as a Public Nuisance
E. Section 11.68.051 - Possession of Graffiti Implements by Minors
The City's proposed Parental Responsibility Ordinance would be complemented by an enforcement
program that would be developed in the following manner:
A first incident involving a minor who is charged with violating one or more of the above.
sections of the Santa CMta Municipal Code, will result in a "Notification Letter" being sent
to the parent or legal guardian. This notification letter will be designed to accomplish the
three (3) specific tasks referenced below. This "letter will serve as:
1) A follow-up notice to parents that clearly explains what violation their child has been
cited under;
2) An official notification, informing the resident(s) that the City has adopted a Parental
Responsibility Ordinance. This information will specifically explain that any future
violation of the City's Municipal Code (limited to the five sections identified in the
ordinance) by their child, may result in the parent. being charged with the offense of
failing to supervise a minor,
3) An opportunity for residents to voluntarily seek some type of support or assistance
to address a potential family concern. This letter will encourage parents to contact
the City's Community Services Division if they would like to learn more about the
resources that are available to help both them and their children.
A second incident involving a minor charged with violating one or more of the above sections
of the Santa Clarita Municipal Code, could also cause the parent or guardian to be charged
with the separate_ offense of failing to supervise a minor. If it is determined by a court of law
that the individual has violated this ordinance, the offending individual(s) would be deemed
guilty, of a progressive infraction. In lieu of a monetary fine, the offending individual(s) would
be required to either: 1) complete a court approved parenting course; or 2) complete. no less.
then 50% of the total number. of community service hours assigned to their minor child. As
proposed, this ordinance would allow first time "violators" with the opportunity to choose
one of thetwo.options.
A third incident involving.a minor charged with violating one or more of the above sections
of the Santa Clarita Municipal Code, could also cause the parent or guardian to be charged
with a "second parental violation" for failing to supervise a minor. 'If it is determined by a.
court of law that the individual has violated the provisions of .this ordinance, the offending
individual(s) would be deemed guilty of,a progressive infraction. In lieu of a monetary fine,
the offending individual would be required to complete whatever option they did not choose .
during their first appearance in court.
A fourth incident involving a minor charged with violating one or more, of the above sections
of the Santa Clarita Municipal Code, could also cause the parent or guardian to be charged
with a "third parental violation" for failing to supervise a minor. If it is determined by a court
of law that the individual has violated the provisions of this ordinance, the offending
individual(s) would be deemed guilty of a progressive infraction punishable, and would be
subject to. the maximum fine. of $250.00
■ Any subsequent "parental. violation" of this ordinance would .be considered a Class "A."
Infraction, and maybe punishable by a fine of up to $1,000.
In conclusion, the proposed Parental Responsibility Ordinance has been developed as a means to
provide resources to families in need of assistance. 'While this ordinance cannot possibly help
everyone, staff believes it would be a valuable'tool to assist both -parents and children who are still
"reachable."
RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council direct the City. Manager to bring proposed Ordinance 97-3 back for First
Reading at the August 26, 1997 regular meeting of the City Council.
h �parental\7-97stud.y
ATTACHMENT.
Proposed Ordinance 97-3
ORDINANCE NO. 97-3
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA, CREATING CHAPTER 11.69
OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO PARENTAL
RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE ACTIONS OF MINORS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, DOES ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Section 11.69.010 is hereby added to the Santa Clarita Municipal Code to
read as follows:
11.69.010.. Failure to Superyise a Minor.
A person commits the offense of Failing to Supervise a Minor if: the person is the parent,
legal guardian or person with legal responsibility for the safety and welfare of a child under the
age of eighteen (18) years of age, and the child has been found on private property or premises
open, to the public and cited, for violating any of the following Sections of the Santa Clarita.
Municipal Code:
A. Section 11.18.010 - Drinking in Public
B. Section 11.56.015 Curfew Restrictions for Minors .
C. Section 11.57.010 - Truancy Restrictions for Minors
D. Section 11.68.031 —Declaration of Graffiti as a Public Nuisance
E. Section 11.68.051 - Possession of Graffiti Implements by Minors
SECTION 2. Section 11.69.020 is hereby added to the Santa Clarita Municipal Code to
read as follows:
11.69.020. Violations by Children Thirteen Yearsof Aee or Youneer
If a child, is thirteen (13) years of age or younger, 'and violates any one of the provisions
of the City of Santa Clarita Municipal Code.referenced in Section 1.1.69.010 of this Ordinance;
the citation shall be issued shall to the parent, legal guardian, or person with the legal
responsibility for the safety and welfare of the child for violation of this Ordinance, rather than to
the child for violation of any Section of the Santa Clarita. Municipal Code referenced in Section
11.69.010 of this Ordinance.
0
SECTION 3. Section 11.69.030 is hereby added to the Santa Clarita Municipal Code to
read as follows:
11.69.03. Warning To Parents.
The parent(s),'legal guardian, or person with the legal responsibility for the safety and
welfare of the child shall be issued a "Notification Letter" from the Los Angeles County Sheriff's
Department the first time their child is cited for an offense_ described in Section 11.69.010 of this
Ordinance. This warning letter will serve as an "Official Notice" to the parent(s), legal guardian,
or person with the legal responsibility of the child that their child came into contact with a law
enforcement representative, that the City has adopted a Parental. Responsibility Ordinance, and
that any future violation of the offenses described in Section 11.069.010 of this Ordinance by their
child, may result in their being charged with the offense of failing to supervise a minor.
SECTION 4. Section 11.69.040 is hereby added to the Santa Clarita Municipal Code to
read as follows:
11.69.040. Penalty.
A.
1. The first time an individual(s) is convicted for violating Section 11.69.010
of the.Santa Clarita Municipal Code, the individual(s) shall be deemed guilty of a Progressive
Infraction. In lieu of a monetary fine, the offending individual(s) shall be required by the court to
either: 1) complete a Court approved parent effectiveness program; or 2) complete no less then
fifty percent (50%) of the total number of community service hours assigned. to the minor child
whose legal responsibility they are charged with.
2. Individuals convicted. of a first offense of this ordinance shall be afforded
the opportunity to choose either one of the two options referenced in Section 1-1.69.040 (a) of the
Santa Clarita Municipal Code.
3.: If the offending individual(s) chooses the option to complete community
service, the individual(s) shall be required by the court to complete all such community service
hours in the company of their child.
B. The second time an individual(s) is convicted for violating Section 11.69.010 of
the Santa. Clarita Municipal Code, the individual(s) shall be deemed guilty of a Progressive
Infraction. In lieu of a monetary fine, the offending individual(s) shall be required by the court to
complete the option referenced in Section 11:69.040 (a) that the individual did not complete as a
result of the individual(s) first conviction for violating Section 11.69.010_ of the Santa Clarita
Municipal Code.
C. The third time an individual(s) is convicted for violating Section 11.69.010 of the
Santa Clarita Municipal Code, the individual(s) shall be deemed guilty of a Progressive Infraction
punishable as set forth in the Santa Clarita Municipal Code, Sections 1.01.200 and 1:01.230
thereof, and subject to the maximum fine amount of $250.00.
D. Any subsequent violation of Section 11.69.010 of the Santa Clarita Municipal
Code shall be considered a Class A infraction, and may be punishable by a maximum fine of
$1,000.
SECTION 5. Section 11.69.050 is hereby added to the Santa Clarita Municipal Code to
read as follows:
11.69.050. Restitution.
In addition to any fine or penalty imposed pursuant to this ordinance, the Court shall order
the parent, legal guardian, or person with the legal responsibility for the safety and welfare of the
minor to pay any restitution to a victim of the minor's conduct. The amount of restitution
ordered. pursuant to this Ordinance shall not exceed $2,500.00.
SECTION 6. The City Clerk shall certify the passage of this ordinance and shall cause
the same to be published as required bylaw. .
PASSED AND APPROVED this day of 1997.
MAYOR
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
i
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
I, Sharon Dawson, City Clerk of the City of Santa Clarita, do hereby certify that the
foregoing Ordinance No. was regularly introduced and placed upon the first reading at a regular
meeting of the City Council on the day of , 1997. That
thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council
on the day of , 1,997 by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS
CITY CLERK
h:Vctonoian\ympcU7-3