County paints bull's-eye on underage drinking

BY ERIC LINDBERG
DAILY SOUND STAFF WRITER

County leaders targeted underage drinking at house parties with a 4-1 vote on Tuesday to draft legislation that could levy civil and criminal penalties against party hosts, parents and others responsible for property where minors are caught drinking alcohol.
Known as a social host ordinance, the legislation would supplement laws already on the books that make furnishing alcohol to a minor illegal.

Board of Supervisors Chair Salud Carbajal said while there are still areas of concern and plenty of questions to tackle in the coming months, he is optimistic about the effect such an ordinance would have on underage and binge drinking locally.
“It’s really just changing attitudes like we did with seatbelts for our kids,” he said. “They automatically buckle up now. … I think it’s creating that attitude and culture change.”
Along with potentially establishing criminal penalties for egregious circumstances and repeat offenders, the ordinance could impose civil fees to cover emergency response costs for police or medical personnel and serve as a strong deterrent to hosting parties for teens.
Unlike criminal laws currently in effect, simply the existence of underage drinking at a party would automatically allow police to cite the host or property owner, rather than trying to prove who supplied or served the alcohol.
Backed by Sheriff Bill Brown and District Attorney Christie Stanley, along with organizations such as Fighting Back and the Santa Ynez Alcohol and Drug Coalition, the concept of a social host ordinance addresses what many feel is a serious problem in local communities.
“Underage and binge drinking is a significant issue,” said Susan Paul, county assistant CEO and human resources director. “In fact, it’s the No. 1 drug of choice for today’s youth.”
In a presentation to the board, Paul described how alcohol is a factor in nearly half of all teen car crashes and up to two-thirds of teen suicides and sexual assaults.
Penny Jenkins, president and CEO of Fighting Back, added more statistics to the mix, emphasizing results from a recent report on alcohol and drug use among teens in the South County that showed 90 percent of teens say they get alcohol from home.
“That’s what we’re targeting,” Jenkins said, describing anecdotes about a family throwing parties for teens and charging admission to make money.
“It’s the people that are doing that kind of thing that we are trying to target,” she said.
Other jurisdictions that have implemented or are examining a social host ordinance include Carpinteria, San Luis Obispo, Ventura County, San Diego and Berkeley. County officials plan to examine the success of ordinances in those areas in addition to addressing other concerns raised on Tuesday.
How a “host” is defined is one issue that will have to be tackled before any legislation is approved. Paul said the ordinance could conceivably encompass parents, adults, older siblings, landlords or others who own, rent or lease the property where underage drinking occurs.
But one landlord who owns property on Del Playa Drive, a popular location for large house parties in Isla Vista, protested holding landlords responsible for parties held by their renters.
“We can’t live out there,” he said. “We can’t baby-sit. We can only react to parties after they happen.”
He said attempts to quash underage drinking and property damage by hiring security guards and placing fines for holding large parties in lease agreements have been unsuccessful.
“Holding the host responsible is the way to do it,” he said.
Supervisor Brooks Firestone, who cast the sole vote against moving forward, said landlords aren’t the only people who might find themselves negatively affected by a social host ordinance.
“It’s adding a tool to the toolbox, but I’m afraid the screws will be put on everyone to the extent that there will be unintended consequences,” he said.
Firestone cited examples such as parents who let their children have a glass of wine on special occasions, churches that give out communion, and wedding ceremonies held at private residences.
“The problem is limited to a small number of people,” he said. “Before we bring this ordinance to everyone in the county, we should be sure that we are truly doing something that is worthwhile.”
Supervisors Joni Gray and Carbajal acknowledged the issue of tightening up the definition of a “host,” but said that topic should be addressed in the coming months as staff work with stakeholders, law enforcement and other jurisdictions to draft an ordinance.
“I think we’ve heard a compelling case today,” Carbajal said. “I don’t see, personally, why we should not move forward to craft something that is appropriate for our county.”
Another key concern raised by several supervisors is the issue of getting local cities on board with the concept of a social host ordinance. Any legislation approved by the board would only apply to unincorporated areas of the county, potentially leaving a patchwork around municipalities.
“It’s extremely important that the cities be a part of this,” Supervisor Joe Centeno said.
If not, he argued, problematic parties might simply shift from unincorporated areas into cities.
Carbajal said Santa Barbara city leaders, who voted unanimously in early April to have their staff look into drafting a social host ordinance, are still looking to the Board of Supervisors to take the lead.
Other than Firestone, who recommending waiting to determine how ordinances have worked in other areas, the board voted in favor of moving forward with development of an ordinance.
Staff will look into questions and concerns raised by the board, meet with key agencies, law enforcement, stakeholders and city leaders, put together a draft ordinance and return within 90 days for further discussion.