Despite new Lawrence ordinance, Borough talks continue to stutter

In the aftermath of Lawrence Township's adoption of a controversial underage drinking ordinance Wednesday, the Princeton Alcohol and Drug Alliance met yesterday afternoon in town hall to raise questions about the impact such an ordinance would have if enacted in Princeton Borough and Township.

Lawrence officials unanimously approved the state-sanctioned ordinance, which would empower police to cite underage drinkers on private property.

Lawrence, where Rider University is located, became the second Mercer County municipality and the third college town in the state to pass such a measure. More than half the New Jersey towns with off-campus housing for college students have followed suit.

Glassboro, the home of Rowan University, adopted the ordinance in September while Ewing, where The College of New Jersey is located, passed the ordinance just a few weeks ago. Rutgers University in New Brunswick and Princeton University are the only two New Jersey schools whose municipalities do not have the ordinance.

Princeton Borough officials, however, discounted the influence neighboring towns could have on their decision. "What our neighboring communities are doing will have no impact on whatever decision we make," said Borough Council member Mildred Trotman, who heads the public safety committee — which is assigned to examine the ordinance.

The committee is awaiting response from the PADA after soliciting information from the group in mid-October.

At yesterday's meeting, PADA director Marge Smith opened discussion of the ordinance by passing out slips of yellow lined paper to alliance members and asking them to voice their questions at the meeting. The PADA will now submit these questions to the Borough's public safety committee and the Township Committee for review.

Concerns voiced by alliance members included the ordinance's effect in towns where it has been adopted, the safety of underage drinkers, the financial stress caused by enforcement and the protection of privacy.

"Overzealous enforcement is a major concern in this community," Smith said.

PADA member Maureen Marchetta suggested the implementation of educational and training procedures for police to ensure proper enforcement.

Gary DeBlasio, the director of Corner House, said he wanted to exclude himself from the alliance's discussion because of Corner House's role as a counseling service. He added, however, that his only question about a potential ordinance was, "How will it benefit those with alcohol and drug problems?"

During yesterday's meeting, PADA decided to delay a recommendation on the ordinance indefinitely.

Get the best of ‘the Prince’ delivered straight to your inbox. Subscribe now »

The possible ordinance also came under fire as an important issue in Tuesday's Borough Council and Township Committee elections. All candidates claimed they were opposed to it, using such strong words as "vehemently," "absolutely" and "100 percent" to characterize their degree of objection.

The nearly unanimous opposition to the possible ordinance has led many to believe that public discussion is pushing the measure toward its demise. According to Council member Margaret Karcher, a member of the public safety committee, the ordinance was fourth on the agenda behind livery licenses at the committee's first meeting in September.

But officials are still hesitant to label it dead.

"I would say it never had much breath of life to start with," Council president Roger Martindell said. "But since we haven't discussed it, I wouldn't be prepared to call it dead."