Pending the state’s sign-off, Duxbury police will soon have the option to ticket, instead of arrest, underage drinkers — a $150 civil fine for the first offense, and $300 for additional infractions. On its surface, the measure, overwhelmingly approved this month by Duxbury Town Meeting voters, appears to reinforce the stereotype of a moneyed enclave: a place where parents coddle privileged children, and every window offers a soft-focus view of an insular world. But the ability to levy fines gives police a new tool and a middle path that can help young people in any community avoid a criminal record for backyard drinking.
Duxbury Police Chief Matthew Clancy, who championed the change in the town’s public safety bylaw, makes a compelling argument. Here’s the typical scenario: Police confiscate the beer and booze, round up the kids, and call their parents to the scene. Arrests are rare, Clancy says, unless partygoers “talk themselves into handcuffs’’ by being belligerent or violent. The goal, he says, has always been “to secure the scene, identify the kids, and get the parents there,’’ not to turn a youthful lapse in judgment into a criminal record that can affect college and career prospects.
But it wasn’t working, leading to the need for a more pointed approach. “The inaction actually emboldened them,’’ Clancy says. “We made them safe, but we didn’t apply a consequence.’’ He deserves credit for his pragmatism, and for publicly acknowledging a practice that is common among police departments — most don’t have the resources or the inclination to make mass arrests for minor offenses, nor do the courts have the capacity to process so many cases. Besides, compare the prospect of a criminal charge for backyard drinking with the $100 civil penalty for possessing an ounce of marijuana in Massachusetts. It’s out of proportion.
The ability to levy fines provides an intermediate policing step that encourages consistency in enforcement, and recognizes “teens are going to make impulsive and poor decisions,’’ says Karen Wong, coordinator of Duxbury FACTS (Families, Adolescents, and Communities Together Against Substances). The group, along with Duxbury selectmen, its school committee, and Plymouth County Sheriff Joseph McDonald, supported the measure. But for the ticketing to have a lasting effect, she and Clancy say, parents have to take it seriously. That starts with refusing to pay off their children’s fines, and knowing what’s in the works for a weekend night. The penalty also could be made more meaningful by incorporating a community-service component. Offenders might be required to assist with after-school programs or to help spruce up parks and other public places.
Although a small number of Massachusetts communities already have ticketing provisions on the books — including Plympton, where Clancy was once police chief — there are no data to show whether they help head off more serious problems. But given the long relationship between young people and rowdy drinking parties — which sometimes lead to tragedy on the roads — current enforcement methods have proved ineffective. The Duxbury vote — which still needs state Attorney General Maura Healey’s endorsement — has brought more attention to the concept of imposing civil fines in some cases instead of initiating criminal proceedings, mostly because of the South Shore town’s socioeconomic standing. But there should be no income test for common sense. Other local governments — urban or suburban or small town — should adopt similar measures.
