An apparent loophole in Independence Township’s alcoholic beverages ordinance has led to problems prosecuting those under the age of 21, so a revised ordinance has been proposed.
The board of trustees on Tuesday, Aug. 19 passed first reading of the new ordinance, with second reading expected in September.
State law has been amended to clarify the offense, but local units of government tend to pass similar ordinances to make violations a local offense.
According to township attorney Steve Joppich, local prosecution of “minor in possession” cases has been challenged because of language “which outlaws the possession or transportation of alcohol by a minor but does not specifically prohibit the consumption of alcohol” while in a motor vehicle.
“It does not address the word consumption,” Joppich said. “There is an argument that if you have it in your body, you ‘possess’ it,” but the argument is not always solid.
The revised ordinance, written to parallel revised state law, says, “A person less than 21 years of age shall not purchase or attempt to purchase an alcoholic liquor, consume or attempt to consume alcoholic liquor or possess or attempt to possess alcoholic liquor.”
While there are limited exceptions (including use of sacramental wine or working in undercover police operations), the new law defines any “bodily alcoholic content” as 0.02 percent.
“This will help us in court with prosecuting those matters,” Joppich said.
Dana Fortinberry, 52-2 district judge, told the board there are potential problems even with the revised law, since the maximum penalty is a $500 fine, substance abuse treatment and community service.
“We’ve had some problems with it, because I have so many repeat offenders,” Fortinberry said. “We’re not allowed to put first offenders in jail unless they fail to follow a court order. Obviously, we would use incarceration only very sparingly, but there are kids who need to have that held over their head to get them to comply with the court’s orders to get meaningful alcohol treatment.”
Fortinberry said there are efforts underway in Lansing to add jail time as a possible penalty, but trustees opted to pass the first reading of the revised ordinance as presented, with the understanding that further local revisions may be made in the future.