TIGHTER DRUG-FREE ZONES AT SCHOOLS GAIN SUPPORT

But Some Lawmakers Aren't Sold on Changes

Gov. Jon Corzine, a state panel he appointed, his attorney general
and all 21 county prosecutors yesterday endorsed a proposal to shrink
the "drug-free zones" around schools and public buildings to make
them more effective.

They said the current zones are so large they blanket entire sections
of many cities, defeating their purpose of giving drug dealers a
reason to move while creating racial disparities in sentencing. They
reasoned that tighter drug-free zones -- with harsher penalties for
dealing inside them -- would better protect children from exposure to
illegal drugs.

But even with the backing of the state's top elected official and law
enforcement leaders, the proposal remains controversial with
lawmakers wary of being branded soft on crime.

"I'm not for it," said Senate President Richard Codey (D-Essex). "I
think it's sending the wrong message. You would want to lessen the
exposure of kids to drug sales as much as possible."

The proposal to shrink drug-free zones was originally made two years
ago by the New Jersey Commission to Review Criminal Sentencing, which
concluded the current zones do not deter drug sales near schools. It
also found 96 percent of those jailed for drug-free zone offenses
were black or Hispanic.

Current law mandates minimum jail terms of one to three years for
those who sell drugs or possess them in significant quantities within
1,000 feet of school or 500 feet of parks, libraries, museums or
public housing projects. In Newark, those overlapping circles form
one continuous mass that blankets 76 percent of the city, excluding
the airport.

The commission recommended shrinking all of the drug-free zones to
200 feet and eliminating the mandatory minimums while increasing the
maximum prison terms for violations.

That proposal was unanimously endorsed yesterday by the task force on
sentencing and corrections of the Governor's Government Efficiency
and Reform Commission.

"We believe the commission proposal actually will better support the
intent of the original law to create safety zones around New Jersey
schools and public areas, so as to protect children and young people
from the drug trade," said former Chief Justice Deborah Poritz, who
chaired the 22-member task force.

Corzine quickly embraced the proposal as part of his anti-crime initiative.

"These reasonable changes have a broad base of support that includes
every county prosecutor in New Jersey and a diverse group of leaders
in the corrections and law enforcement community," Corzine said.

Attorney General Anne Milgram said reforming the drug-free zones
would "get the drug dealers away from our children" and "is part of a
broader anti-crime strategy aimed at putting violent offenders in jail."

Cumberland County Prosecutor Ronald Casella, president of the county
prosecutor's association, agreed.

"By focusing on properties more likely to be connected to school and
public activities and by enhancing the penalties, we send a message
that we are serious about keeping schools and public property truly
free of drug activities," Casella said.

But Codey is just one of many lawmakers who are not persuaded by the
argument that drug-free zones should not cover large swaths of cities.

"Where's the problem?" asked Assemblyman Peter Biondi (R-Somerset).
"If I could make my entire district drug-free, I would do that."

Biondi is sponsoring a bill (A3851) that would increase the penalties
for possessing drugs inside drug-free zones while keeping them at
their current size. Senate Minority Leader Leonard Lance
(R-Hunterdon) said, "My first thought might be simply to increase the
penalties."

Privately, some lawmakers have said a vote to shrink the drug-free
zones could be used in a political attack ad portraying them as
coddling drug dealers.

"I can understand why some legislators would think that way," Codey said.