Council Youth Curfew Vote Delayed After Last-Minute Deal

A youth curfew ordinance expected to pass the City Council Wednesday was pulled at the last minute after Mayor Brandon Johnson’s office struck a deal with Downtown Ald. Brian Hopkins to replace the measure with a compromise proposal.

The substitute ordinance would formalize existing police powers to disperse disruptive youth gatherings while banning the kind of snap curfews that sparked controversy across the city last year. The revised measure could come up for a vote in February.

Hopkins’ original proposal would have allowed Chicago police to impose curfews of up to four hours anywhere in the city with 12 hours’ notice. The 2nd Ward alderman said he had enough support to pass the measure but wasn’t sure it could survive a mayoral veto.

“We needed 34 votes to override, and that was going to be tight,” Hopkins said after Wednesday’s council meeting. “This compromise gives us something that can actually become law.”

The backroom negotiations played out in full view during Wednesday’s council session. Hopkins was seen huddling with Johnson’s senior adviser Jason Lee and chief of external affairs Kennedy Bartley in the hour before the scheduled vote.

Those discussions produced a substitute ordinance introduced just 20 minutes before the final vote was set to begin. The new proposal, dubbed a “declaration of disruptive youth gathering,” would codify police authority that already exists under state law.

The compromise represents a significant retreat from Hopkins’ more aggressive curfew proposals. In June, Johnson vetoed a Hopkins ordinance that would have allowed police to impose curfews with just 30 minutes’ notice. That measure passed with 27 votes, seven short of a veto override.

The curfew debate has divided the council along familiar lines, with downtown and business district aldermen pushing for broader police powers while progressive members express concerns about targeting youth of color.

The issue gained urgency after several high-profile incidents involving large groups of young people in the Loop and Near North Side. Business groups have pressed for stronger enforcement tools, while community activists warn curfews criminalize normal teenage behavior.

Under the compromise proposal, police would retain existing authority to disperse groups engaged in disruptive or criminal activity. But the ordinance would explicitly prohibit emergency curfews imposed without advance notice to the public.

“This formalizes what police can already do while preventing the kind of knee-jerk curfews that caused problems before,” said a City Hall source familiar with the negotiations.

The revised ordinance still faces hurdles. Progressive aldermen who opposed Hopkins’ original curfew proposals haven’t committed to supporting the compromise. And community groups that fought previous curfew measures are reviewing the new language.

“We need to see the actual text before we can say whether this addresses our concerns,” said Maria Santos, director of the Chicago Youth Justice Coalition. “Any measure that gives police more tools to target young people deserves close scrutiny.”

The curfew issue has become a political flashpoint in Johnson’s first term. The mayor campaigned on criminal justice reform but faces mounting pressure from business groups and moderate aldermen to crack down on youth gatherings downtown.

Last summer’s youth curfew veto was one of Johnson’s first major confrontations with the council. The compromise suggests both sides are looking for ways to address public safety concerns without a repeat of that battle.

Hopkins, who chairs the council’s zoning committee, has been one of Johnson’s most vocal critics on public safety issues. The 2nd Ward includes much of the Loop and River North, areas where several high-profile youth incidents occurred.

“My constituents want to know their businesses and neighborhoods are safe,” Hopkins said. “This gives police clear authority while respecting due process concerns.”

The timing of Wednesday’s deal caught many aldermen off guard. Several members said they learned about the substitute ordinance only minutes before it was introduced.

“This is how things get done around here,” said one South Side alderman who asked not to be named. “Hopkins needed cover to avoid another veto, and the mayor needed to show he’s willing to work with the council.”

The compromise ordinance will likely face committee review before returning to the full council. That process could take several weeks, pushing any final vote into February at the earliest.

Community groups plan to use that time to organize opposition if the proposal doesn’t address their concerns about discriminatory enforcement. Several organizations that fought previous curfew measures have already begun coordinating their response.

“We’ve beaten back these proposals before, and we’ll do it again if necessary,” said Rev. Michael Thompson of the Garfield Park Community Coalition. “Young people have a right to exist in public spaces without being criminalized.”

Business groups that supported Hopkins’ original proposal are reviewing the compromise language. The Magnificent Mile Association and other downtown organizations have pushed for stronger enforcement tools to address what they describe as chronic safety problems.

The substitute ordinance represents Johnson’s latest attempt to navigate between competing pressures on crime and public safety issues. The mayor has faced criticism from both sides for his handling of youth-related incidents downtown.

Whether the compromise can attract enough support to pass remains unclear. Hopkins said he’s confident the measure addresses concerns that sank previous proposals, but several council members remain uncommitted.

“We’ll see what the final language looks like,” said Ald. Maria Hadden, whose 49th Ward includes parts of Rogers Park. “Any proposal that impacts young people needs to be carefully vetted.”

The February timeline puts the curfew debate in the middle of budget season, when aldermen typically focus on spending priorities rather than new ordinances. That scheduling could work in favor of opponents who want to delay or derail the measure.

For now, police retain their existing authority to disperse disruptive groups under state law and department policies. The compromise ordinance would formalize those powers while setting new limits on emergency curfew declarations.