Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 7.1 Open Keg Law CITY OF DUBLIN AGENDA STATEMENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: April 9, 1990 SUBJECT: Report on "Open Keg Law" (Prepared by James W. Rose, Lieutenant) EXHIBITS ATTACHED: (1) City of San Leandro Ordinance 90-07 (2) Alameda County Ordinance Code, Chapter 6 of Title 3 , Article 23 (3) Letter from Karen Seals regarding "The Open Keg Law" RECOMMENDATIONS: . (1) Receive Staff presentation (2) The Staff (3) Give Staff Direction FINANCIAL STATEMENT: None DESCRIPTION: At its meeting of March 12 , 1990, the City Council directed Staff to research the request by Karen Seals for an "Open Keg Law" . Ms. Seals was contacted to obtain more specific information about "open keg parties" as indicated in her letter to the City Council. Ms. Seals had no firsthand knowledge of any parties, but said she had received two phone calls from parents that were concerned about keg parties. They called her because of her affiliation with the "Dublin Substance Abuse Council" . Staff researched police records to determine if there have been any recent parties classified as "keggers" ; where it was necessary for Dublin Police to intervene. Upon checking police records and talking with the patrol Watch Commanders, no evidence was found that Dublin Police have been called upon to respond to a "kegger party" within the past eighteen months. This, of course, does not mean that such parties did not take place; only that police were unaware of such activities. Staff checked with other cities within Alameda County and found that only two local jurisdictions have an ordinance that deal with "open keg" laws. In 1989, the Alameda County Board of Supervisors approved the addition of Article 23 to Chapter 6, Title 3 of the Alameda County Ordinance Code (see attached) . In 1990, the San Leandro City Council adopted Ordinance Number 90-07, adding Article 6 to Title 4 , Chapter 1 of the San Leandro Municipal Code. The Alameda County Sheriff's Department and the San Leandro Police Department are the only two law enforcement departments with local ordinances governing groups where police intervention is called for, with San Leandro being the only one specifically addressing possession of alcoholic beverages by persons under 21 years of age. The following is a summary of the provisions of the ordinances and the procedures for their implementation. ALAMEDA COUNTY ORDINANCE This ordinance is very broad and deals with second police response for a party or other assemblage. It does not have specific language that addresses "KEGGER PARTIES" or alcoholic beverages. The ordinance is designed to provide a vehicle so that the County can receive cost reimbursement for a second police response for a party or other assemblage that is determined to be a threat to public peace, health, safety or general welfare. The person in charge of the party or assemblage must be warned of the consequences upon the first police response damage, etc. ) will be billed to the person in charge of the party or assemblage. This is a civil remedy only and no criminal charge is included under the scope of this ordinance. IMPLEMENTATION• Staff was informed by the Watch Commanders at the Alameda County Sheriff's Department, Eden Township Substation that this ordinance has never been used. Since there is no provision for criminal charging, the standard procedure has been to shut down unruly parties or assemblages immediately if it is deemed to be a threat to health or safety. If any violations involving the serving or possession of alcoholic beverages is observed, whether it involves adults or minors, action is taken using the laws already available to local police agencies, the Alcohol Beverage Control laws, the California Penal Code and the Business and Professions Code. CITY OF SAN LEANDRO ORDINANCE This ordinance is more specific in dealing with a "social gathering" where persons under the age of 21 are present and where alcoholic beverages are being possessed or consumed by any person under 21 years of age. This ordinance does not use the term "open keg law" but it is designed to allow police intervention at a "social gathering" in a home, hotel or motel room, or other residential facility where two or more person under the age of 21 are present and where alcoholic beverages are being possessed or consumed by any person present under the age of 21. The ordinance, as written, is a misdemeanor, with a maximum fine of $1 ,000. It is not limited to a second response and may be enacted upon first observance. IMPLEMENTATION' This ordinance, has not, as of this date, been used by the San Leandro Police Department. RECOMMENDATION Staff does not believe that there is a need for an ordinance of this type unless the City Council wishes to recover costs associated with police responses. There are existing Alcohol Beverage Control laws, the Penal Code and the Business and Professions Code that address possession and consumption of alcoholic beverages and laws that cover the sales, furnishing or giving of alcoholic beverage to a person under 21 years of age. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COPIES TO: ITEM NO. IN THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF SAN LEANDRO ORDINANCE NO. 90 - 07 (1413) AN ORDINANCE ADDING ARTICLE 6 TO TITLE IV, CHAPTER 1 OF THE SAN LEANDRO MUNICIPAL CODE, RELATING TO POSSESSION OR CONSUMPTION OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES BY MINORS AT SOCIAL GATHERINGS The City Council of the City of San Leandro does ORDAIN as follows: . Section 1. Article 6 is hereby added to Title IV, Chapter 1 of the San Leandro Municipal Code to read as follows: "ARTICLE 6 - SOCIAL GATHERINGS; ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES; UNLAWFUL Section 4-1-600: SOCIAL GATHERINGS WHERE MINORS POSSESS OR CONSUME ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES; UNLAWFUL. No person shall allow, permit, or host a social gathering at his or her residence, hotel or motel room, or other residential facility under his or her custody or control, where two or more persons under the age of twenty-one (21) are present and alcoholic beverages are being consumed by or are in the possession of, any person under the age of twenty-one (21) . " Section 2 . This ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after adoption and the title thereof shall be published once prior to adoption. Introduced by' Council Member Glaze on this 19th day of March 1990, and passed to print by the following called vote: Member of the Council: Ayes: Council Members Faria, Glaze, Jardin, Perry, Santos, Suchman; Mayor Karp (7) Noes: None (0) Absent: None (0) Attest: Alice Calvert, City Clerk Passed and adopted this day of , 1990, after publication on 1990, by the following called vote: Members of the Council: Ayes: Noes: Absent: Attest: Alice Calvert, City Clerk 136\slmc\4-1-600.ord Approved as to Form MAR 1. H100RE, Count Counsel ey —� ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE ADDING ARTICLE 23 TO CHAPTER 6 OF TITLE. 3 OF THE ORDINANCE CODE OF T22 COUNTY OF ALANEDA RELATING TO SECOND RESPONSE CALLS BY THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTI�JENT TO PARTIES OR ASSFMBLAGES WHICH PRESENT A THREAT TO THE PUBLIC PEW E. HFALTH,,,SAFETY OR GENERAL WELFARE The Board of Supervisors of the County of Alameda ordains as follows: SECTION I Article 23 is added to Chapter 6 of Title 3 of the Alameda County Ordinance Code to read as follows: , Article 23 SECOND RESPONSE CALLS BY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT TO PARTIES WHICH PRESENT A THREAT TO THE PUBLIC PEACE, HEALTH, SAFETY OR GENERAL WELFARE Section 3-250.00 NOTIFICATION OF LIABILITY FOR ~COSTS OF SECOND RESPONSE. When the Sheriff's Department is called to the scene of a party or assemblage and a Deputy Sheriff determines that there is a threat to the public peace, health, safety; cr ggeneral welfare, the Deputy Sheriff' shall notify the owner of the- premises, ' the person in lawful custody of the premises, or the person responsible for said assemblage ttfat that person, (or if that person is a minor, the;,-parents or guardians of that minor,: person) shall, be personally�.liable; for the costs. incurred °f6r.,;-providing Sheriff's,"personnel :.for.- a second':'-or '*su_bsequent response `the"same`"location''due"'to 'a' continuation of 'the'same 'conduct. Section 3-250.14 PERSONS RESPONSIBLE FOR COSTS OF SECOND RESPONSE. The costs incurred by the Sheriff's Department for a second or subsequent response to a party or assemblage which is a threat to the public peace, health, safety, or general welfare shall- be charged to and borne by the owner of the premises, the person in lawful custody of the premises, or the person responsible for said assemblage, (or in the event that person is a minor, that person's parents or guardians) . Section 3•-250.2. SECOND RESPONSE- DEEMED `"TO 'BE'' SPECIAL' ASSI( 'T. The first response and warning shall be deemed to be normal police service. Personnel utilized on a second or subsequent response shall be deemed to - be on special assi-m-ent. The costs incurred from such special assignment are declared to be beyond normal services provided by the Sheriff's Section 3-250.3. $1000.00 LIMIT. The costs of such special assignment include personnel and equipment costs, damage to County property and injuries to County personnel. The Sheriff's. .Department will"determine the-reasonable.-.cost-of-such special assigrment, but not more than $1,000.00 for a single incident. The remedy provided by this Article shall be in addition to any other remedy provided by law. Section 3-250.4. COLLECTION OF EXPENSES. such special assigrnent shall be a charge against ethe person liable for costs under this Article. 'Ihe charge constitutes a debt of that person and is collectible by the County in the same manner as in the case of an obligation under a. contract, ex- pressed or implied. Section 3-250.5; LIM.ITATICN OF. `A.PPLICATICN OF DINANCE. This ordinance shall not apply to any assemblage 00 gathering the purpose of which is the exercise of protected speech, including but not limited to union meetings and picket- SECTION II This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty 0 after the date of passage and before the expiration of fifteen s from and 15 after its passage it shall be published once with the names of the members voting for and against the same in The Inter-Cit err published in the said County of Alameda, y Express, a newspaper Adopted by the Board of Supervisors of the Count y Alameda of California, on the day of , State of . . . following called vote: by the AYES: Supervisors NOES: Supervisors EXCUSED: Supervisors Chairman of the Board of Supervisors, County of Alameda, State of California ATTEST: WILLIAM MEHRWEIN, Clerk, of the Board of Supervisors, County of Alameda, State of California By DT:kf 2/01/89 9320J/4 Dublin City Council 100 Civic BLVD. DECEIVED Dublin , Ca . 99568 MAR 1590 CITY ,QE DUBLIN Dear City Council : It has been brought to my attention that open keg parties are a reality in our city . I would like to request the Dublin City Council as a body to consider adoption of The open Keg Law" . I feel our city would benefit from such a law at this time . As you know alcohol is the drug of choice in our city . And all segments of our community must strategically work together for environmentally focused strategies to reduce alcohol related problems among youth. Then Dublin will be a healther city for our future Sincerely Karen Seals 7068 Prince DR. Dublin , CA. 91568 cc: DSAC