Lynchburg testing youth curfew to address crime Lynchburg City Council adopts youth curfew as 'test' to address juvenile crime

LYNCHBURG - Lynchburg law enforcement will have a new tool beginning Friday to combat what city leaders are calling an "uptick" in juvenile crime, after Lynchburg City Council voted earlier this week to approve a citywide curfew for minors ahead of the summer release of the city's school division.

Council voted 6-1 on Tuesday to approve the curfew, with Vice Mayor Chris Faraldi in opposition. The ordinance will go into effect on Friday at 8 a.m., however the curfew will not effectively take place until 11 p.m. Friday night.

The adopted ordinance will place a curfew on anyone 17 and younger in the Hill City between the hours of 11 p.m. and 5 a.m. Council adopted a sunset clause on the ordinance as well, meaning the curfew law will expire Dec. 1 unless other action is taken to extend or shorten it.

The curfew closely tracks Charlottesville's curfew ordinance, which has stood up to Virginia appellate court reviews, City Attorney Matthew Freedman said.

According to the ordinance, any violation of the curfew "shall be punishable as a Class IV misdemeanor," which carries a $250 fine, Lynchburg's Commonwealth's Attorney Bethany Harrison said.

However, Harrison and Lynchburg Police Chief Ryan Zuidema said the fine is mostly for the parents who knowingly allow their child to violate curfew. They added violations of the curfew by minors who do not "have any involvement in the juvenile court system" will likely be deferred out of the court system to various programs in the juvenile and domestic relations court.

"It's not a heavy-handed ordinance where we come in and see how many people we can lock up," Zuidema said. "Not my goal and I don't think the goal of anybody who has been involved in this."

In prior interviews, both Zuidema and Harrison positioned the curfew as simply a "tool" in the toolbox of local law enforcement, providing them the opportunity to get out and speak to juveniles who are out on the streets past curfew and investigate if other criminal activity is afoot.

But Zuidema did say Tuesday night that the curfew will provide help to get "the worst of the worst" off the streets, saying juveniles with a history of violent crime who violate the curfew will trigger a "condition" in their probation allowing the department to bring them in.

While council issued a decisive vote on the curfew, Tuesday's discussion - spread out over both council's work session and regular evening meeting - was extremely in-depth, as council wrestled with balancing the need to address public safety amongst young people and protecting their civil liberties.

Faraldi, who was the lone vote of opposition, said he didn't think this council was "elected to adopt, I'll say, police-state styled approaches to crime in the city.

"I think we should be taking a more strategic approach into truly prioritizing and emphasizing excellence and investment in our law enforcement personnel so they are the best equipped to go out and do their jobs and put people behind bars who need to be put behind bars," he added.

Providing research he sought out since the May 9 meeting, where the curfew was originally proposed, Faraldi said he did not think the outcome of the curfew was going to meet the expectation.

"In many ways, I believe this has a high probability of causing more problems than it solves," the vice mayor said.

He also brought up other issues with the process of the curfew ordinance, such as pointing out council moved rather quickly on its adoption without proper public input and a lack of sufficient public awareness period ahead of Friday's effective date, but other members of council positioned the curfew simply as a "test" for the upcoming months.

"Again, this [is] a test," Ward III Councilor Jeff Helgeson said. "We've heard from people that say, 'Oh it doesn't work, or it does work.' I really hope in this six months that the police officers take this really serious and really use this as a great tool and in six months it's not needed anymore because the bad apples are removed."

A moment of contention during the curfew debate came when At-large Councilor Larry Taylor, who originally proposed the curfew, questioned Faraldi on where he lived after the vice mayor said he did not support the curfew.

Taylor, a resident of White Rock Hill, said "I still live downtown, I talk to people downtown. My constituents asked me for a curfew, they're gonna get one. ... You don't have 15, 16-year-olds out in your neighborhood, walking around doing whatever they want to do after midnight, OK? I do."

Faraldi pushed back saying he's lived all over the city, but said he saw issues in the curfew based upon the language saying officers "may" charge the minor with a violation and not "shall."

"Let's be honest about what this is," he said. "It's a $250 fine that says to our law enforcement that they may or may not stop a young person and so the law enforcement officer now has to make a decision about why I should stop Chris Faraldi at 15-years-old, potentially, or Larry Taylor at 15-years-old.

"Now ultimately ... if we have to put officers in that situation, it says 'may' issue a citation. ... If you're going to make a rule, make it apply across the board," he argued.

Zuidema said during the work session it was his recommendation to change it to "may" instead of "shall" because officers have no discretion under "shall" language.

"... [Shall] means we will lock up and arrest every juvenile that is out between 11 [p.m.] and 5 [a.m.], period, if they are not within any of these exceptions," the chief said. "That is not what I think we need to be doing as a police department or as a community."

Ultimately, council approved the ordinance with "may" language, giving officers discretion upon each stop, with Helgeson, Mayor Stephanie Reed, Ward I Councilor MaryJane Dolan and Ward II Councilor Sterling Wilder all advocating for it to stay that way.

While Wilder questioned the efficacy of the curfew, he later said in the meeting he understands the need for it and had many of his questions answered on Tuesday.

Misjuns, who threw his support behind the curfew nearly immediately, continued to push city leaders to provide monthly reports on its effectiveness in order to measure its impact on crime. But he also provided his perspective as a former first responder with the Lynchburg Fire Department.

"I've been there when you've had a couple teenagers with bullet holes in their chests and they're hanging on for dear life ... and it's always in the middle of the night," he said.

"It's another tool in the toolbox ... but I believe the seven of us up here are wise enough to look at the information and if ... down the road we realize it's not doing at all what we intended it to do, we can repeal it," Misjuns added.

Mayor Reed put her support behind the curfew after saying it "seems like the first step" in addressing juvenile crime, but said more conversations need to be had on the issue of crime.

Even with the stigma the word "curfew" brings, Reed stressed the fact that council's intentions are good.

"I think everyone's intentions are good here, I really do believe that," she said.

Addressing the crowd remaining in council chambers well into the evening, the mayor encouraged the community to come together around the curfew to help curb violent crime.

"This is a community effort ..." she said. "If you guys, as the example of those who are willing to come be a part of the solution ... can get out and encourage others to say, 'hey, this is our city, let's all come together,' that can make a big difference."

To view the full curfew ordinance, visit the city's website at lynchburgva.gov/city-council-meetings-video-minutes-agendas and download the May 23 work session agenda packet.