New liquor inspector reinterprets state law

Author: By Thomas C. Drescher and Caroline S. Stauffer

Middlebury's new state liquor investigator, Michael G. Davidson, met with members of the College community last Wednesday to discuss preliminary plans to curtail on-campus party hosting and modify registration procedures. Davidson's reforms could have serious, long-term implications for the College's social scene.

Davidson's most drastic suggested change is a redefinition of the term "public resort" that will prevent any individual or organization from serving alcohol at an open party unless the event is licensed, catered and registered at least 21 days in advance. Social house members present at the meeting expressed serious concerns regarding the additional expense and inconvenience of obtaining a catering license, especially when parties are often organized last-minute.

Other meeting attendees questioned whether the application of such strict procedural requirements would actually limit underage drinking, but Davidson, while admitting that state liquor laws were not created with collegiate social life in mind, emphasized his role strictly as an enforcer of the law.

Davidson stressed the existence of a certain amount of legal gray area, noting that social houses will probably still be able to host events with a designated guest list, such as semi-formals, as long as a student is willing to act as the sole host.

Another of Davidson's main policy modifications revolves around the legal concept of the "domicile." State law mandates that individuals can only host parties in their domiciles, or homes. Based on this statute, a student who lives in Pearsons Hall, for example, will only be able to host parties in Pearsons, and not in any other space on campus.

At the meeting, attendees voiced concerns that such a change would disadvantage some students given the uneven distribution of social spaces in residence halls across campus. As a remedy, Dean of Student Affairs Ann Hanson reiterated the College's long-term goal to equalize social spaces among the commons, affirming that it must now become a priority.

Student Government Association President Andrew Jacobi '05 explained at the meeting that current alcohol policy is "conducive to College-supervised, on-campus parties," and effectively discourages dubious off-campus gatherings. Davidson said he understands the motivation behind such a policy, but perceives certain deviations from state law that amount to a "double standard" for the College - his reforms are intended to eliminate this double standard.

Assistant Treasurer and DBS Tom Corbin inquired about the feasibility of applying for permanent licenses for all the social houses, but Davidson explained that by acquiring such licenses the houses would effectively become places of public resort. Consequently, individuals would not be allowed to bring alcohol into the houses - not even into their own rooms. Dean of the College Tim Spears mentioned a similar and equally unappealing option for social houses: requiring that members obtain bartending licenses to serve at parties. Licensed members would be subject to the same legal restrictions as party hosts, and could lose their licenses and face criminal charges for serving to underage guests.

As a liquor investigator, Davidson oversees the enforcement of Vermont state liquor laws within his particular area of jurisdiction, which was recently expanded to include the town of Middlebury and, of course, the College. Davidson formerly worked with students and administrators at Castleton College to develop a more restrictive alcohol policy that closely resembles what he is proposing for Middlebury. Davidson was on vacation and unavailable for comment at press time.



STUDENTS SPEAK OUT

Although student leaders on campus have been respectful of Davidson and his position during the early stages of discussion, concern does exist surrounding the potentially drastic changes to social life on campus.

"We're still pretty early in discussions with the liquor inspector about coming up with a policy that will work for everyone," Jacobi said. "He doesn't make the law; he just interprets it and enforces it."

Jacobi noted, however, that Davidson's interpretation of Vermont state laws in the Middlebury College environment is different from that of the two previous inspectors.

"The last two liquor inspectors were willing to grant the College some leeway in how they interpreted the law because of the College's efforts to curtail underage drinking, binge drinking and the access of non-students to campus parties," he said.

Jacobi is especially concerned that tighter restrictions and obstacles to hosting parties on campus will push students off campus, where there is no Public Safety, no limit on the amount of alcohol served and drunk driving becomes a much greater risk.

Student Co-Chair of Community Council J.S. Woodward '06 shares this concern:"Though the changes in the interpretation of the law are not without grounds, I do fear that the new inspector's departure from the precedents set down will lead to an increase in dangerous drinking, as well as more parties off campus and more incidents of drunk driving," he said. "I won't place a value judgment on the inspector's decision, but I don't plan to sit around and twiddle my thumbs."

Woodward, who supports the College's current policy, believes the ideal solution would be to update the Vermont state alcohol control laws, which have stood without amendment since the Prohibition era.

"In my opinion, [the laws] encourage destructive or dangerous behavior and are a cause of many of the substance abuse problems in the state," he said. "I sincerely hope the local legislators take the energy and thought that was provoked with the recently presented bill to reduce the legal drinking age to 18 and divert them to liberalizing the other laws surrounding alcohol consumption to better reflect what many of us now believe to acceptable or responsible behavior."

Like Jacobi, Woodward noted the drastic differences in Davidson's interpretation of state law as applied to the College and the previous inspectors.

He fears that truly "open parties" may be a thing of the past. "I expect to see a lot of guest lists next year and fewer parties in total," he said. "Furthermore, I think we're likely to see more students end up at Porter Hospital and I think we're all going to hold our breaths that we don't see an incident involving drunk driving. In turn, I feel that the College's relationship with the greater Middlebury community will be strained. Overall, I don't see anyone benefiting from these new interpretations of the law."

Woodward noted that the social houses would be among the most affected entities on campus given that all parties will have to be licensed and that member dues cannot be used to purchase alcohol.

"Their role as weekend social centers may also be subdued because of the strictness that surrounds the distribution of alcohol at licensed facilities," he said.

Regarding the 21-day period needed to acquire a party license, Alpha Delta Phi (ADP) President Jennifer Yerigan '06 noted that with the exception of a few events each semester, "most of our parties are decided a couple days before hand."

Furthermore, licensed events would require a caterer to serve alcohol. "It would be much more expensive to have parties catered, unless the school comes up with a way to support us," she said.

Speaking in reference to the feelings of members in ADP right now, Yerigan said, "It's disheartening because we have worked so hard to make the house work as it is."

Yerigan was anxious to convey the far-reaching effects such a policy change would bring. "This would affect the whole social scene at Middlebury College, not just the social houses," she said. Yerigan specifically pointed out that athletic teams wo
uld no longer be able to throw parties in spaces such as Pearsons lounge.

"There will be a number of meetings and dialogues over the summer and in the fall," Woodward said. "We will proceed from there. What will precipitate is anyone's guess."



ADMINISTRATIVE CONCERNS

"[Davidson] did a good job laying things out," said Spears. Spears added that he will be meeting next week with Hanson and Corbin to "debrief." Spears commented on the antiquated nature of Vermont liquor laws, many of which, he said, were made in the 1930s, and certainly do not account for social drinking at colleges.

Requiring catering teams to supervise parties - "beer guards" will guard the door - would change the fundamental nature and atmosphere of social house parties, according to Spears. "We don't want suites to become 'safety drinking sites' where all heavy drinking is done before going to parties," he said of one potential effect of the policy reforms.

Corbin acknowledged the efficacy of current College policy regarding alcohol, but added that such a policy must be in accordance with Vermont state law. "Mr. Davidson has agreed to help us, but he has to work within the law," Corbin explained.

"We definitely need to change some of our practices," Hanson admitted, emphasizing the need for cooperation and adding that both the College and Davidson are concerned with student safety and upholding state law.

"The law does not give colleges and universities special standing," affirmed Spears. "The liquor inspector's responsibility is to operate within the parameters of the law, he's not there for 'work-arounds.'"

"Part of the issue is that the laws are vague so we need to make a good faith effort to understand and comply," said Hanson.

Both Hanson and Corbin asserted that Public Safety's role in enforcement will not change, nor will College disciplinary policies regarding alcohol violations. Hanson, Spears and Corbin will head up discussions with Davidson and student leaders this summer to finalize policy changes.

Since stepping down as President of the College last spring, College Professor John McCardell has been a vocal advocate for a more permissive attitude toward student drinking on college campuses.

In light of the current discussion, McCardell asserted his belief that "increasingly zealous enforcement of [the drinking age] among generally law-abiding students will continue to have unintended consequences." Such consequences could include "the breeding of disrespect for law in general, the further forcing of drinking underground, behind closed doors and off-campus and the neglect of other potential violators of the law in places other than our campus," according to McCardell.

McCardell also expressed fear of an increase in drunk driving resulting from stricter on campus regulations. "The purpose of the law raising the drinking age was to reduce alcohol-related automobile fatalities," noted McCardell. "It is hard for me to see how that purpose is served by these new regulations," he added.