Kinnelon Committee: Penalties for Underage Drinking Need Clarity

underage drinking ordinance advisory committee may have discovered a loophole in enacting to penalize those found underage and in possession of alcohol on private property.

As ordinance violations are referred to the borough's Juvenile Conference Committee (JCC) by the Morris County Probation Services office, advisory committee chairman Pat Caserta said he is unsure whether the JCC is able to impose fines, the suggested penalty in the ordinance, to those charged with a violation. If the JCC cannot impose fines, only individuals who are 18-20 would be able to be penalized with fines, as their cases would be heard before a judge in municipal court.

T calls for a fine of up to $300 to be imposed on the first violation offense and no more than $350 on subsequent offenses at a judge's discretion. Also at a judge's discretion, an underage person found guilty of drinking or in possession of alcohol on private property would potentially lose their driver's license for six months or have to wait an additional six months to get his or her license if they are not yet 17 years old.

Committee members listened to  Lt. John Schwartz discuss why the police department would like an underage drinking ordinance on the books. Schwartz said Kinnelon police began pursuing an update to the current ordinance, which allows officers to charge underage drinkers and those who are underage and found in possession of alcohol on public and quasi-public property but not private property, over three years ago. Currently, when police arrive to a house after receiving a call of loud noise and see underage individuals drinking, once in the home, they can take the individuals into protective custody, but not charge them for drinking.

Schwartz said the police believe having the ordinance and penalties would deter the underage drinkers.

"These kids need intervention and they're not going to get it unless they get into the system," he said.

If a person who is younger than 18 years old was charged with a violation, the charge would disappear from their record once they turn 18. For individuals 18 or older, the charge would still appear, although, "If you're 24 years old and you had an alcohol offense when you were 19 at college, it's not going to affect you that much," Schwartz said.

Schwartz also emphasized that police are not able to share information about the juvenile underage drinkers' actions with the school assistance counselor unless they were charged. For underage drinkers charged in Kinnelon, has a counseling process for dealing with students arrested for drug- or alcohol-related incidents. 

While she said she felt that underage individuals should not be drinking in the first place, committee member Lila Helu said she took issue with the fact that the probable cause which would allow police to ever enter a homeowner's property is not spelled out in the ordinance as written. Even currently, police can enter a person's property if they have reason to believe illegal activity is happening. But Schwartz said it is part of the U.S. Constitution that police cannot enter a person's property for no reason.

"We're well-versed in what's legal and what's not and when we can enter a person's property and when we cannot," he said.

Another concern of Helu's was whether the parent or homeowner is responsible if underage drinking is occurring on their property but they are unaware of it. Schwartz said if they are unaware, they would not be charged, but if they supplied the alcohol, they would. If a parent of an underage drinker is away at the time of a party, Schwartz said, they would not be charged criminally, however they could be charged civilly in the event an injury occurs at the home, as a lawyer or judge might argue that the parent did not arrange for proper supervision of their child.

Prior to Schwartz's presentation, Helu said she feels that the parents and kids should be more responsible instead of the police. But Caserta, a lawyer who has represented individuals in cases related to the ordinance, said many Kinnelon parents have the mentality that they would rather allow their kids to consume alcohol in their own homes than not allow them to and have them do it elsewhere, potentially getting into dangerous situations.

"I think, in a lot of ways, that's the problem," he said.

Helu, who raised three children who are now adults, said she would have never allowed her kids to drink, but committee member Jeanine Mazzola, who stated that she does not condone underage drinking, said her parenting style may be different from Helu's and perhaps she would not be as strict, demonstrating how the committee may have differing opinions on the issue. Mazzola said she believes the legal drinking age of 21 is perhaps too old.

Commitee member Michele Barabash-Fradkin asked Schwartz if publicity of the issue has raised the presence of underage drinking on private property.

"I think there's a safety factor," he responded.

Schwartz told the committee, which will be , that he will look into whether the penalties written in the ordinance would still apply to juveniles, but explained to the committee that as far as the police are concerned, they do not care what the penalty is, as long as there would be one.