Attachment 6 - Manhattan BeachAgenda Item #:
Staff Report
City of Manhattan Beach
TO: Honorable Mayor Tell and Members of the City Council
THROUGH: Geoff Dolan, City Manager
FROM: Rod Uyeda, Chief of Police
Randy Leaf, Captain
DATE: February 20, 2007
SUBJECT: Adoption of an Ordinance that Holds Non-Commercial Individuals Responsible
for Underage Drinking of Alcoholic Beverages on Property they Own, Lease or Otherwise
Control, Known as a Social Host Ordinance.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council Adopt Ordinance No. 2096.
FISCAL IMPLICATION:
Implementation of this ordinance may require some additional staff time for enforcement and
fine collection, however the increase is expected to be slight and accomplished by existing staff
and resources.
BACKGROUND:
On February 6, 2007, the City Council unanimously approved the introduction of Ordinance No.
2096, which creates a Civil Social Host Ordinance and adds Chapter 4.128 to the Manhattan
Beach Municipal Code.
DISCUSSION:
As part of the City Council’s 2005-2007 Work Plan, the Police Department was tasked with
researching a Social Host Ordinance; similar to what exists in San Diego and Ventura Counties,
as an additional tool to help address unruly parties and underage drinking
A Social Host Ordinance is a law that holds non-commercial individuals responsible for
underage drinking at parties on property they own, lease, or otherwise control. Purchase,
possession or consumption of alcohol by minors in public or commercial settings is already
prohibited under state law. However, state law does not prohibit youth consumption of alcohol
on private property.
Establishing a Social Host Ordinance can fill the gap in the law by providing law enforcement a
tool to help address the problem of underage drinking at parties. There would be exceptions in
ATTACHMENT 6
Agenda Item #:
Page 2
any such ordinance to protect family and cultural events where parents or guardians give their
permission for their children to take part in events which may involve the consumption of
alcohol.
Social Host Ordinances were created on these basic premises:
• Municipalities have the authority to enact laws that promote public health, safety, and general
welfare.
• The occurrence of underage drinking parties on private property is harmful to the underage
persons, and is a threat to public safety and the general welfare of the community.
• Persons responsible for the occurrence of parties, or in possession/control of the property, have
a duty to ensure that alcoholic beverages are not served to, or consumed by, underage persons.
• Police authority at such gatherings is necessary when such activities are determined to be a
threat to the peace, health, safety, or general welfare of the public.
• Police Officers are often required to make multiple responses to the location of a gathering
where alcoholic beverages are consumed by minors in order to disperse uncooperative
participants – causing a drain on public safety resources, and in some cases, leaving other areas
of the City with delayed police response.
• Problems associated with such gatherings are difficult to prevent and deter unless law
enforcement officers have the legal authority to do so.
• Penalties against the responsible party will serve as an effective strategy for deterring underage
drinking parties – thereby reducing alcohol consumption and abuse by minors, physical
altercations and injuries, neighborhood vandalism, and excessive noise disturbance, and thus
improving public safety.
Different Types of Social Host Ordinances
Two main types of Social Host Ordinances have been enacted in Southern California cities – one
which penalizes violators civilly, and one which criminalizes the violation as a misdemeanor.
Criminal Liability Ordinances – About two-thirds of the cities in San Diego County have
established criminal liability ordinances. San Diego was the first city to implement a social host
ordinance to help reduce underage drinking. However, in October 2004, the San Diego’s
ordinance was deemed unconstitutional by a panel of Superior Court judges. Their ruling was on
the grounds that the ordinance was “constitutionally impermissible” because of “the lack of mens
rea”, or criminal intent, and because it violated a person’s right to due process. Under San
Diego’s ordinance, a person could be convicted even if they were unaware, or would not
reasonably know, (1) that a party was taking place, or (2) that minors were present and
consuming alcohol.
The City of San Diego has recently implemented a revised ordinance, approved by City Council
in April 2006. The amendments (1) impose a duty on social hosts to take all reasonable steps to
ensure that a minor is not consuming alcoholic beverages, and (2) add the requisite mens rea, or
knowledge element. Further, the ordinance now clarifies the remedies available to the City of
San Diego, including criminal prosecution, civil enforcement, and recovery of response costs.
Many San Diego County cities that patterned their ordinance after San Diego’s ordinance have
suspended enforcement of their social host ordinances until they too can revisit and amend their
ordinances. In the interim, ordinances in those cities remain on the books as a deterrent.
Agenda Item #:
Page 3
The Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office was contacted regarding a criminal social
host ordinance. Their office felt that due to the number of issues being raised about the legality
of the ordinance being attacked in San Diego, their office would recommend against the
implementation of a similar ordinance.
Civil Liability Ordinances – Ventura County cities have also established Social Host ordinances
- shifting penalties from criminal to civil, and charging administrative fines of $1,000 or more
for similar offenses.
The City of Ojai was the first city in Ventura County to adopt a social host ordinance. The City
of Ojai determined that a town of their size (population 8,000) could not afford a court challenge
like the City of San Diego and created an ordinance that focused on civil liability instead and has
been successful.
Other municipalities in Ventura County were also interested in pursing a civil social host
ordinance. The County of Ventura’s legal counsel noted that they were in favor of a civil citation
because it is less likely to be contested, but is still effective in deterring adults from allowing
underage drinking parties. Counsel also felt that the adoption of a civil liability ordinance would
be easier to defend as the burden of proof is higher in criminal cases.
Additionally, agencies in Ventura County have found it difficult to prosecute local law
infractions in a regional court setting; the civil liability ordinance has allowed them to bypass the
court system for the most part. As Manhattan Beach files most criminal cases with the Los
Angeles County District Attorney’s office in the county courthouse in Torrance, we are similar
to the agencies in Ventura County.
The civil social host ordinance allows officers to proactively look at underage drinking at private
parties and allow officers to cite irresponsible “hosts” before a party becomes unruly. This
ordinance also gives the police an additional tool to remind any “host” the ramifications of
underage drinking occurring at their party. Currently, officers can only address parties that are
unruly or violate the city’s noise ordinance.
A “host” is defined, but is not limited to, as the person or persons in control of the residence or
other private property and can include owners and/or lessee, the host themselves, a parent or
legal guardian, a minor who is also the “host”, or a tenant. A landlord could also be considered a
“host” provided that the landlord has received notice of prior unruly parties at their property
involving underage drinking.
Thus far, more than fifteen civil citations have been issued and paid in Ventura County for a
100% success rate in the County. The cities of Ojai, Thousand Oaks, Camarillo and County of
Ventura have each successfully cited several “hosts” for violating their social host ordinance and
fines have been paid. The cities of Simi Valley, Fillmore, Moorpark and Santa Paula have also
implemented civil Social Host Ordinances, but have not yet officially cited any persons yet. Law
enforcement agencies from all of the cities have found the civil ordinance to be a useful tool.
Agenda Item #:
Page 4
Fines and Penalties of Social Host Ordinances
Both criminal and civil ordinances present fines/penalties in two parts.
Part 1: A single-occasion house party where underage drinking is occurring is subject to a
citation and fine (and possible imprisonment under the criminal liability law).
Part 2: If the police have to return to a home party location within one year of the first
occurrence, the host would receive a citation and fine, and make restitution for the costs
associated with responding to the unruly gathering, including costs incurred by law
enforcement, fire, and/or other emergency response providers.
The majority of cities with civil social host ordinances adopted fines of approximately $1,000 for
each offense (plus response costs). The City of Thousand Oaks, which also adopted a civil
ordinance, set their fine standard well above other cities in the County – raising fines to $2,500
for the first offense, $3,500 for the second and $5,000 for the third and subsequent offenses (plus
response costs). These were fines that the City Council of Thousand Oaks felt were more
appropriate to sufficiently deter “hosts” and to convey the severity of the offense. Community
service may be substituted in cases where the financial burden is too great or where the “host” is
a juvenile.
The proposed civil Social Host Ordinance for Manhattan Beach has an administrative fine of
$1000 per incident, not including response costs for the first incident within any consecutive 12
month period. For a second such incident within a consecutive 12 month period the fine is $2000
and for a third such incident within any consecutive 12 month period, the fine is $5000.
CONCLUSION
The police department feels that a social host ordinance will be another tool to assist them in the
handling of unruly parties in addition to current laws that are available to deal with such
disturbances. Currently, parties are only addressed by the police when they become loud and
unruly. With a social host ordinance, a party would be considered unruly should the police find
underage drinking occurring and cite the host of such party immediately. This will likely prevent
a number of parties from escalating to a neighborhood disturbance. There will also be clear
message sent throughout the community that underage drinking under the guise of a private party
will not be tolerated and that “hosts” of such parties will be held accountable for such activity
occurring on their property.
Attachments: A. Ordinance No. 2096