ACLU cautions Churchill school board about drug-sniffing policy

By MICHAEL MARESH

Nevada Appeal News Service

The Churchill County School Board was put on notice Thursday night about potential lawsuits from the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada involving dogs sniffing backpacks of students.

The school board is considering an administrative regulation to allow dogs to sniff backpacks of high school and junior high students.

Lee Rowland, northern coordinator for the ACLU of Nevada, warned the board what could happen if a complaint was lodged with them against the district.

In a four-page letter to the school board, Rowland wrote that schools across the country have tried and failed in the courts on passing random drug searches with no suspicion.

The ACLU was contacted by concerned members of the community that this proposal was being discussed.

She said it is a bad policy and one that the courts have never agreed to.

She said districts that have tried to pass similar measures have ended up paying students and families large sums of money to settle the cases.

In one case - B.C. v. Plumas Unified School District - she pointed out that once the courts made the ruling a sniff was a search, the question was if it was a reasonable one.

The court ruled in this case it was not because the district had no record of a drug problem, the searches were involuntary, unannounced and sudden and the drug dogs brought fear to students and their safety.

Citing an article from the Lahontan Valley News where Superintendent Carolyn Ross stated she did not think there was a drug problem in the district and wanted to prove that belief, was a point Rowland mentioned.

She said the court would consider that fact.

At the end of the meeting, while discussing a student survey, school district attorney Sharla Hales pointed out that 30 percent of students reported being offered, sold or given illegal drugs on school grounds in the past 30 days.

She said the courts may have to consider this fact.

"We believe the proposed policy lies in walking a razor-thin line between existing court decisions and this risks a court challenge," she said. "We also believe that if upheld to be a search, there is little question that the search would definitely be unreasonable."

Rowland said the district and school board needs to be aware of the problems of the proposal.

"There is no court to say you can do that and no court that says you can't," she said, asking if the CCSD wanted to be the one to test the policy in court.

She said having a policy like this in place alienates students from the staff because they are being told they are not trusted.

"I think it is fair to say you are on thin ice," she said. "The potential consequences are very (harsh). We urge you not to pass this. This is not a gray issue. It has the potential to have negative connotations."

Mark Jones, a parent of three children and opponent to the measure, said the reason the Washoe County School District policy holds water is searches are done on reasonable suspicion.