Charlotte's 16- and 17-year-olds, who have been exempt from the city's curfew, will have to be off the streets by 10 p.m. starting Nov. 1, along with everyone younger, unless an exception applies. The City Council voted 9-2 Monday night to run the curfew as a pilot through Aug. 31, 2027.
Before the vote, Police Chief Estella Patterson promised council that officers would not pull over a driver just because the driver might be a minor out past curfew. That promise is not yet written policy. Patterson said the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department is working to change its policy to match it. One of the two members who voted no said she wanted that change made first.
What changes Nov. 1
The curfew is CMPD's answer to what the department calls teen takeovers: large groups of teenagers gathering in public places late at night, which Patterson said are "really pushed by social media." The ordinance now on the books sets the curfew by age: 10 p.m. for children 12 and under, 11 p.m. for ages 13 through 15, and no curfew for 16- and 17-year-olds. The pilot replaces those tiers with a single rule, 10 p.m. to 6 a.m., for everyone 17 and younger.
The existing exceptions carry over. A minor may be out with a parent or authorized adult, on an errand for a parent, traveling to or from work, responding to an emergency, or at a supervised school, religious or recreational activity. Asked by Council Member Kimberly Owens of District 6, Patterson confirmed that exercising First Amendment rights is also an exception.
CMPD plans to use October for a public education campaign before enforcement begins, and Patterson will report to council every quarter. She described enforcement as "a progressive enforcement approach, meaning we will give warnings, we will educate," with existing juvenile diversion programs for cases that go further. "I do not want to see any teenager end up in prison, in jail, because of a curfew violation," she said.
The 10 p.m. start is an hour later than CMPD first proposed. The council's Safety Committee advanced a 9 p.m. curfew in July, and the full council debated a 9 p.m. pilot in August without voting. "After listening to the public, we feel that a 10 o'clock would be appropriate," Patterson said Monday.
The traffic stop question
At the August meeting, city legal staff told council that an officer's visual judgment that a person appeared to be a minor could provide reasonable suspicion, the legal standard an officer needs to pull a car over, for a traffic stop to check for a curfew violation. On Monday, Patterson said the pilot would not work that way.
"We do not want our officers initiating a traffic stop just because of a curfew violation," she told Council Member Reneé Johnson of District 4. A stop for a separate driving offense, she said, would still be allowed.
Johnson said she had asked the same question before and been told the opposite. "When I asked the question the first time, the answer was yes," she said. "I'd like to see that policy changed first before I would consider that. Because that's a big deal."
Council Member JD Mazuera Arias of District 5 asked Patterson for a verbal commitment. "You do have my commitment," Patterson said, adding that CMPD would make clear to its officers "that they will not stop a teenager just only on the suspicion of a curfew violation."
The vote, and the data behind it
Johnson and at-large Council Member LaWana Mayfield cast the two no votes, The Charlotte Observer reported. Mayfield told Patterson she had "a concern with changing the time when we don't have the data to say why the 11 o'clock is not working."
Patterson did not claim to have that data. "Just to be completely transparent, we don't have a lot of numbers because we haven't been collecting," she said. The pilot, she said, is how CMPD intends to collect them.
The takeover figures she did give are hard to compare. Asked by Johnson whether teen takeovers had declined since the debate began, Patterson answered, "No, ma'am. Actually, the numbers have increased." She said CMPD had counted 40 when she last briefed council and now counts, for the year to date, "55 advertised and 15 actual." She did not say whether the earlier 40 included events that were advertised but never happened.
Several members who voted yes did so with stated reservations. "I agree with you, Chief, that teens should be home and accounted for by 10 o'clock," Owens said. "Where I differ is that I believe that this should be a parental decision and not a government decision." She said she would support it because it is a pilot and because one time for every age is "more workable for families." "I think we have to give you the benefit of the doubt," Council Member Malcolm Graham of District 2 told Patterson. "I'm committed to following until I have a reason not to."
The public speakers were nearly unanimous. Mayor Rob Harrington said 37 or 38 people had signed up to speak on the item, and Johnson noted that one speaker had opposed the proposal. Council Member Ed Driggs of District 7 said 36 people had waited for hours to speak in favor.
What the pilot is supposed to show
Patterson said CMPD will track whether crimes against young people and crimes committed by them decline, the number and severity of teen takeovers, and the police hours spent responding. She said a team at Johnson C. Smith University is ready to help analyze the data. At-large Council Member Dimple Ajmera asked for results broken down by age, race, geography and enforcement outcome "so we can determine whether this policy is actually improving safety without producing unintended disparities."
The education campaign runs through October. Enforcement begins Nov. 1.