news-record.com

NEWS

Complaints of loitering led to curfew

Thursday, November 18, 2010
(Updated 2:27 pm)

—  A new late-night curfew banning teenagers from downtown came as a result of feedback from area business owners that loitering youth have been driving customers away — not because they were committing crimes, city officials say.

The curfew, which goes into effect Jan. 1, bans anyone under 18 from downtown between 11 p.m. and 6 a.m, with some exceptions.

The measure passed by a 6-3 vote at Tuesday night’s City Council meeting.

“It’s one of the smaller things we have to deal with downtown,” said Councilman Zack Matheny, regarding overall problems with teenagers. “It’s hard to explain. But with the conversations we’ve had, (teens loitering) has been adding to the issues.”

Capt. Wayne Scott, commander of the police department’s central division, which includes downtown, said crimes involving teenagers have been relatively few.

“We don’t make a lot of criminal charges against underage folks downtown,” Scott said. “The number one issue from stakeholders is what they perceive is (teens) loitering. They come downtown, they can’t get into clubs, they hang out on sidewalks and walk up the streets.”

Business owners, he said, “perceive that in a negative light.”

Scott said most teens who have been approached by officers downtown for loitering have cooperated when asked to move along.

Even then, he said, the only major teen loitering issues have come when clubs have “teen nights” when hundreds of youth are on the streets as clubs close and can’t leave downtown as they wait for rides or walk home.

“It all depends on how you describe a problem,” Scott said of teens downtown.

Scott said overall, he feels that the majority of problems downtown have been caused by the high number of places selling alcohol in a small area.

“Those businesses are going to stay open and sell alcohol as long as they can,” Scott said.

“Between 2 and 3 a.m. (people) are all getting forced out onto the streets at once. It’s taxing on our resources because we go from a handful of calls to a huge spike for everything from disorderly conduct, fights, assaults, alcohol violations — these are things happening behind closed doors in the clubs that are being forced out onto the streets and into the parking decks.”

Matheny said he doesn’t feel that the city is treating teens unfairly with the ordinance, but instead is protecting them in the event of another shooting like the one that happened Oct. 28 outside the N Club downtown.

“If we have teens out at 2 a.m. in the morning standing outside a bar... and gunfire opens up, are they going to get shot because they are standing there?” Matheny asked. “We are saving them by getting them off the streets when something bad could go down.”

At Tuesday night’s council meeting, Councilwoman T. Dianne Bellamy-Small voted against the curfew — saying teens aren’t the problem —  it’s irresponsible bar owners.

“The problem is some of the bar owners, the alcohol consumption and the fact we haven’t dealt with some bar-owner situations over the past three years,” she said.

Scott said he anticipates ordering his officers to use discretion in enforcing the curfew and other amended ordinances that put more restrictions on loitering.

“We are not looking to target anyone who is not causing a problem,” Scott said, who anticipates officers calling parents to pick up their children or escorting them home for breaking curfew.

“We are going to enforce the ordinances as fairly as we can. We don’t plan to change the way we police drastically. This is just one more tool in our toolbox.”
 

Contact Ryan Seals at 373-7077 or ryan.seals@news-record.com   

Accompanying Photos

File photo (News & Record)

Comments

This article has been closed to new comments. Comments are generally closed after 14 days. However, comments may be closed earlier at the discretion of the News & Record.

Inappropriate content? Please report abuse.

brian444

November 18, 2010 - 3:55 am EST

I see: it isn't a public safety issue so much as a business issue. The business owners downtown have the legal right to determine who can appear in public.

dosssva

November 18, 2010 - 8:29 am EST

Not if you're of legal age. This applies only to minors. But it sounds better your way...I love hyperbole and stand up comedy.

brian444

November 18, 2010 - 2:31 pm EST

"A new late-night curfew banning teenagers from downtown came as a result of feedback from area business owners that loitering youth have been driving customers away — not because they were committing crimes, city officials say."

Newspaper Reader

November 18, 2010 - 12:00 pm EST

You are right on target, Brian. I encourage everyone to read "Juvenile Curfews: The Rights of Minors vs. the Rhetoric of Public Safety" at //www.abanet.org/irr/hr/fall99humanrights/budd.html on the ABA website. I quote from the article. ":

"Strict scrutiny requires that any measure infringing the fundamental rights of an adult class be narrowly tailored to promote a compelling governmental interest.Some courts have held that this protective standard applies to the rights of minors as well—and, not surprisingly, have struck down curfews as a result."

The biggest problem with Greensboro's curfew is that it does not "promote a compelling government interest." The city council is using the curfew to promote business interests.

Further, curfews should not be viewed as a "tool." What does that mean, anyway? A tool for what? A tool is something one uses as needed. This curfew is not a tool. It is a government-imposed prohibition. Anyone who even looks like he is under 18 (and I know some 25 year old adults who fit that category) will be stopped, IDs will be checked, tempers will flare and teenagers (and adults) will end up in detention--all to serve the interests of the downtown businesses.

Last, this curfew does not protect teenagers and get them off the streets--it simply moves them to other streets--again, all to serve the interests of downtown businesses.

I have nothing against downtown businesses--I am pleased that downtown Greensboro has become such a vibrant place and I wish these businesses great success. I simply have very serious reservations about a government entity imposing a curfew on a select group of people--who for the most part are law-abiding citizens--to promote the interests of private businesses.

pragmatist

November 18, 2010 - 12:50 pm EST

An excellent response, NR.
This policy, cobbled together in a matter of days and poorly vetted, will almost certainly be enjoined. So, at a time when we should be encouraging commerce and watching government expenditure, we are not only depriving downtown businesses- and I'm talking about ALL downtown businesses, not just nightclubs- of a viable clientele, but setting ourselves up for a costly defense of a policy that does nothing to quell the violence that, ostensibly, sparked the issue to begin with.
One other thought: an 11pm curfew doesn't mean teens will scatter at 11. It means, they won't come downtown at all at night, since they realize whatever they're doing must end well before 11, to give them time to get out.

Newspaper Reader

November 18, 2010 - 2:01 pm EST

Thank you, pragmatist.

N&R placed it's latest curfew article on the front page of N&R's website first thing this morning. It's had 33 comments and counting. This is a hot, not to mention important, topic. It is is now off the website's front page--and more difficult to find--as of 1:45 p.m. this afternoon. It will not be easily accessible this evening. Hmmm...what's up with that quick turnaround?

Newspaper Reader

November 18, 2010 - 4:46 pm EST

N&R put it back up. WTG, N&R!

axelskater

November 18, 2010 - 2:43 pm EST

I live downtown. The restaurants, theaters, even sports bars that sell food are not the problem. The viable clientele - teenagers - you refer to are not spending money in downtown businesses. They are wandering the streets and causing problems. I have pictures from at least 4 separate occassions this past summer. There have been crowd dispersal techniques (riot sirens, flashlights & eventually pepper spray) which have been employed on these "viable clinetele" you refer to. They damaged Center City Park tables, the fountain, the soda machines after hours when the park was supposed to be closed & people were loitering. This "viable clienetle", which is not spending money in reputable business establishments, were breaking laws being in the park after hours & destroying property there, as well as damaging newspaper stands on public streets. I have seen it all with my own eyes, and filmed much of it.
If you do not live downtown and you do not SEE all of these things up and down Elm Street (and some of the worst incidents DID take place on Sunday's during these "teen nights" which area clubs hosted) then please refrain from ridiculous sweeping generalizations which are incorrect.
MS Bellamy-Small is 100% wrong in her assessment. Most of the loitering, destruction of property, fights & such are not taking place because of bar owners. They are doign these things blocks away from any club. She knows nothinig going on there.

Newspaper Reader

November 18, 2010 - 3:27 pm EST

With all due respect, axelskater, you are making sweeping generalizations and scapegoating teenagers. Even "Capt. Wayne Scott, commander of the police department’s central division, which includes downtown, said crimes involving teenagers have been relatively few."

He further states that "overall,... the majority of problems downtown have been caused by the high number of places selling alcohol in a small area." Further, "Between 2 and 3 a.m. (people) are all getting forced out onto the streets at once. It’s taxing on our resources because we go from a handful of calls to a huge spike for everything from disorderly conduct, fights, assaults, alcohol violations — these are things happening behind closed doors in the clubs that are being forced out onto the streets...."

axelskater

November 18, 2010 - 9:33 pm EST

The events which I refer to and filmed (sorry, but you cannot dispute the evidence of pix & videos) took place between the hours of 11:30pm and 1am. The problems in Center City Park took place just after midnight & way before 2am.
He can state whatever he likes about additional problems upon later hours of clubs closing, but the loitering issues are taking place before these clubs empty out - clubs which by the way, in general on most nights do not allow anyone under 18 anyway. The younger loitering crowd is what we are dealing with in regards to the ordinance. The clubs will be dealt with as separate issues in the upcoming months.
I am more than happy to post pictures of large groups of 40, 50, 60+ teens and young adults standing in the streets and sidewalks, blocking sidewalks, loitering in the park. And until you live downtown and witness it downtown week after week for yourself, you can only conjecture, while those of us who are here have evidence and facts. "Crimes" involving teenagers may be few in the sense of shootings ad such...but the destruction of property, the trespassing in the park, the blocking of sidewalks & illegally loitering in the streets (YES that is on the books already) are there. You can dislike the facts as much as you like, but it won't change them.

Newspaper Reader

November 18, 2010 - 10:23 pm EST

It is apparent from this comment and other comments you have posted here that you are frustrated and angry. I hear that. I stand by my assertion that a government-imposed curfew of all teenagers is neither an effective nor an appropriate solution to the aforementioned problems.

axelskater

November 19, 2010 - 10:29 pm EST

I would like to hear your more appropriate solutions

Panacea

November 18, 2010 - 10:31 pm EST

Can you post your videos on YouTube?

axelskater

November 19, 2010 - 10:26 pm EST

Panacea- Being a huge fan of irony, I was actually going to post the pix on the "Against the Curfew" Facebook page. I will have to see if I can put the video there also. I will try to do it tomorrow

axelskater

November 20, 2010 - 11:27 am EST

Panacea the pix are up on the Curfew Facebook page. But probably not for too long. No video right now.

Get Real

November 18, 2010 - 3:57 am EST

Stupid! What are kids supposed to do for fun in this city? What can ANYONE do for fun in this city anymore. The city is victimizing young people for something they have nothing to do with just so Greensboro looks like it's "doing something" about a horrible situation. Thumbs down.

dosssva

November 18, 2010 - 8:30 am EST

What are minors doing for fun on the downtown streets of Greensboro after 11 at night? Don't be an imbecile!

Get Real

November 18, 2010 - 12:00 pm EST

11 o'clock is NOT that late, especially on weekends. There are plenty of things to do that are not alcohol related for kids to do that's ruined now. No art galleries. No First Fridays. No all ages shows at Greene Street or the Green Bean. Greensboro is a culture killer.

rmacz

November 18, 2010 - 12:15 pm EST

What about midnight basket ball with Algore...ha!

axelskater

November 18, 2010 - 2:26 pm EST

Art Galleries and First Friday events close at 9. Not a valid argument.

Get Real

November 19, 2010 - 3:41 am EST

I guess you're right. Greensboro's art scene IS pretty weak.

Theo

November 19, 2010 - 6:15 pm EST

Get real....You really need to get real!! Teenagers + Downtown after 11pm = Very poor parenting!

nhalleycat

November 18, 2010 - 10:01 am EST

I left Moses cone hospital this morning at 3:30 AM. There were young kids on bikes during a school night just hanging around a street corner. They belong home. Store owners have a right to keep the front of their store free off loitering. I went to a furnature store a couple yrs. ago and there was a homelss person sitting in the door way. I feel sorry for any one who is down on their luck but it does drive people away when the entrance way is blocked or people hanging around in front of a store. The stores are paying high rent or taxes and should have a place of business free from loitering.

Alberto

November 18, 2010 - 5:26 am EST

Anyone else laugh when they read that the police aren't even going to enforce this stupid new law?

dosssva

November 18, 2010 - 8:32 am EST

I laughed when I read your post. It said this was another tool in their toolbox and that they would use discretion in enforcement. What article did you read?

Panacea

November 18, 2010 - 12:12 pm EST

Same one as you did.

The translation from police is: we'll enforce the new curfew when we feel like it.

There's an old axiom in medicine: if you don't take a temperature you won't find a fever. Same thing applies here: if you don't ask for ID, you won't catch a minor out past curfew.

DougBaker

November 18, 2010 - 5:44 am EST

Everybody take note. This will be remembered as the first step in turning downtown back into a ghost town. Councilwoman Bellamy-Small is spot on; go after the sleazeball club owners who refuse to take responsibility.

axelskater

November 18, 2010 - 9:41 pm EST

If by ghost town you mean people coming and spending MONEY at restuarants, watching plays, catching games & having some beers, watching a movie at Carolina Theater, attending events in the park, checking out the galleries, enjoying the park during normal hours & skating at the rink without fear of being blocked in the street, yelled at while walking to their cars, etc. Then most clear-thinking people CAN'T WAIT!!

Theo

November 19, 2010 - 6:22 pm EST

Doug....Bellamy-Small has never had an intelligent idea! She is probably part of the group of bad parents allowing their children downtown after 11pm....Siding with Bellamy-Small truly minimizes any point you attempt to formulate.

blackstream

November 18, 2010 - 5:59 am EST

Once again, the wealthy and influential have spoken. The snobs don't want kids around so here you go. If you'll notice, they made sure it specifically states teens, not adults. Lexington once made that mistake and it came back to bite them on the backside when the snobs wanted to gather downtown. Those so called business owners don't realize that those teens are a large part of their customer base during the day. When these teens become adults, I'm sure they'll remember how they weren't wanted downtown and continue to stay away as adults. I could understand this if they were causing problems, but just because the snobs don't want them there? It's true, the world is full of morons!

eMail Updates

Advertisement | Advertise with Us

Featured Ads

Search

Advertisement | Advertise with Us
Advertisement | Advertise with Us
Advertisement | Advertise with Us

News & Record Network Sites

User Tools

  • Mobile
  • Social
  • RSS
  • Share
  • Sign in to MyNR

Search