HILLSBOROUGH: School board puts off decision on random drug testing

Wants to hear from public before discussion, vote in October

By Gene Robbins, Managing Editor
   Hillsborough school board members put off a decision Monday night whether to abolish its random drug-testing policy.
   The board scheduled the topic for more discussion on Oct. 22. Prior to the meeting, administrators were asked to investigate and report what other school districts do with testing and drug prevention. The school board’s education committee will also review other policies that relate to preventing drug use among students.
   Parents are encouraged to tell the board — by email, responses on the school’s web site, letters or phone calls — how they feel.
   According to the policy, all students who participate in extra-curricular activities, clubs, interscholastic and intramural athletics or who have school parking permits must participate and submit a urine and/or saliva specimen to the school nurse, when requested.
   Board member Greg Gillette, who has long prodded the board to reconsider the policy, said he viewed random drug testing as an intrusion of students’ Fourth Amendment rights under the Constitution’s Fourth Amendment, which pertains to unwarranted searches and seizures.
   He said the state Supreme Court found a way to allow random drug testing by separating voluntary activities from the education day. He said it ruled that anything — sports, clubs, even driving to school — beyond classroom activities could be regulated.
   He said he thought the “high school experience” went beyond the schoolroom hours and “you cannot separate those two things.’
   Former school board member Neil Hudes, who left in 2011, said dropping the testing would be like giving up one weapon in the war on drugs. He asked rhetorically why board members thought drug testing was the part of the overall anti-drug approach that had failed.
   Rather, he said he saw the move to eliminate drug testing as steps by individual board members pursuing their own personal philosophy, rather than being critical, sophisticated thinkers.
   Member Jennifer Haley said she didn’t want to abolish the policy until the district came up with a better overall plan to fight drug and substance abuse. “There are children who need this protection who don’t necessarily get it at home,” she said.
   Member Christopher Pulsifer said the district needed every program it had to combat the problem of drug and substance abuse. He said data and surveys reinforced that there was a problem, but didn’t tell the school if the random testing had any effect.
   Member Thuy Anh Le suggested putting the question aside and asking the community to weigh in. At the same time, the board should do more investigation on its goals and policies in the area, she said.
   Board President Thomas Kinst said the school board mission is to provide a safe, secure environment but that drug and alcohol abuse off campus and outside of school hours is a parental responsibility and “we need to respect that.”
   Member Dana Bogusewski concurred, saying that outside of a safe educational environment it is the parents’ job to oversee their children. She said she wanted to hear how the public felt.
   The purpose of the program is directed toward deterrence and remediation, reads the policy. “The policy is not intended to be disciplinary or punitive in nature… No pupil shall be expelled or suspended from school as a sole result of any verified test.”