cannabisnews.com: Parents Protest Use of Drug Dogs at School Parents Protest Use of Drug Dogs at School Posted by FoM on March 18, 2001 at 10:57:31 PT By Fred Alvarez, Times Staff Writer Source: Los Angeles Times Outraged by a policy that allows police dogs to sniff out drugs on this city's middle school campus, some parents and community leaders have launched a campaign to outlaw the searches, saying they violate students' privacy rights. The policy was adopted in 1998 by the Santa Paula Elementary School District board and put into effect this year at Isbell School after a flurry of drug-related expulsions at the 1,200-student campus. The practice isn't universally condemned, though. Other parents and some educators defend it, including Isbell Principal Sheryl Misenhimer, who said she has no doubt that the use of a Santa Paula Police Department canine has helped keep drugs off the campus. However, opponents say the practice casts a wide net of suspicion over all students at Santa Paula's lone middle school and undermines constitutional guarantees to privacy. "Students do not leave their privacy rights at the schoolhouse gate," said school board member Ofelia De La Torre, who has led the push to abolish the policy since getting elected in November. "I am for a drug-free environment for our kids," she said. "I just don't like the way this is being done. We should find other ways to deter the problem, if there is one." Opponents have been joined by the Ventura County chapter of the League of United Latin American Citizens, which is threatening legal action if the policy is not rescinded. Misenhimer said parents were advised at the start of the school year that the searches would take place, and a canine demonstration was put on at Back to School Night in late September. A German shepherd conducted three random searches of classrooms from October to December. No drugs were found during any of the searches, which Misenhimer cites as evidence that the surprise inspections discourage drug activity. The searches have been suspended for now pending a school board review. However, supporters have launched a petition drive aimed at ensuring that the policy remains in force. "I didn't bring dogs in here to catch kids--it's a preventive measure," said Misenhimer, who has been at Isbell for 13 years, the last three as principal. "I do respect the view of people who feel this violates the rights of children, but I want to protect kids," she said. "My philosophy behind this is I'd rather overstep someone's rights and get sued than find one of our kids overdosed in the bathroom." The controversy has tapped a larger debate about how best to safeguard school campuses, a topic now receiving plenty of discussion in the wake of a spate of school shootings nationwide and reports that drinking and drug use are on the rise locally. Indeed, Ventura County school districts differ widely on the use of drug-sniffing dogs. While school officials in Ventura, Ojai and Camarillo do not use drug-sniffing dogs, administrators at Fillmore High and Santa Paula High have enacted policies within the past year that allow such searches. The Simi Valley School District has had a similar policy on the books since 1994, and random searches were done for a while at high schools and middle schools. But no searches have been done since the 1996-97 school year because of problems coordinating with the Simi Valley Police Department, said Lynn Johnson, the district's director of secondary education. She said the district hopes to restart the searches soon. Officials in Thousand Oaks and at the Oxnard High School District use a private firm, Interquest Detection Canines, to conduct searches at their schools. Chuck Eklund, director of secondary education at the Conejo Valley Unified School District, said dogs have been sniffing for drugs at the district's high schools and middle schools for about a year and half. The dogs also are trained to find gunpowder, which Eklund says is key given the rash of school shootings nationwide. He said there have been few complaints about the anti-drug effort. "We're always looking for new strategies to help students say no," he said. "The dogs seldom find anything during these searches, and that's a good thing." Scott Edmonds, a former police officer who runs the regional franchise of Interquest Detection, said his dogs conduct searches at 82 Southern California campuses. About one-third of those are middle schools, he said. Last year, he said, the dogs uncovered three guns, nine explosive devices and a slew of drugs and alcohol at those campuses. "I think the value is enormous, because you're making the schools safer," Edmonds said. "We're not here to bust the kids. The goal of the program is to keep this contraband out of schools any way we can." On that point, Edmonds and state Atty. Gen. Bill Lockyer don't see eye-to-eye. In an opinion issued in November, Lockyer concluded that a public high school cannot implement a policy that requires students to vacate their classrooms and leave behind their personal belongings so that dogs can sniff them over for drugs. Such a search would violate a student's 4th Amendment protection against unreasonable search and seizure as well as privacy guarantees afforded by the California Constitution, Lockyer wrote. Those seeking to strike down Santa Paula's policy point out that the random searches at Isbell School have been conducted in the exact manner warned against by the attorney general. They cite Lockyer's opinion as sufficient reason to abolish the practice. "There are parents throughout this district who are frustrated by this Gestapo-style approach to children's rights," Santa Paula parent Jesse Ornelas said. "If there is a real problem with drugs, let's sit down and discuss the policy and find out what works. Let's not just sic the dogs on them." But former school board member Janet Grant, who was on the panel at the time the policy was adopted, said she believes that many more parents favor the practice, noting that more than 100 people already have signed a petition demonstrating their support. She also notes that Lockyer's opinion is nonbinding. "When students go to school, they give up certain rights," Grant said. "When the kids themselves are telling staff and telling administrators that they know students who are no longer bringing drugs to school because they are afraid of getting caught, then I would say it's working." Santa Paula's policy allows dogs to sniff out and alert staff to the presence of drugs around lockers, desks, bags and vehicles on district property or at district-sponsored events. Dogs may not, however, sniff students or be used in rooms when youngsters are present. The school board is set to reconsider the matter April 10. At that time, board members could decide to drop the policy, keep it in force or revise it. Past meetings have drawn people deeply passionate about each side of the issue. "People have not come to blows, but we have had a lot of heated arguments and discussions," said George Morgan, who was elected to the board in November and is the father of a 12-year-old Isbell student. "I for one have no objections to having drug-sniffing dogs on campus," he said. "The principal of Isbell and the district superintendent are adamant that the need does exist, and I guess at the moment I'm taking them at their word." Neither school board member Dan Robles nor board President Michelle Kolbeck could be reached for comment. However, Kolbeck has publicly stated her support for the policy. School board trustee Tony Perez, who was elected in November 1998 but had not yet been sworn in when the policy was adopted, said he believes the practice violates students' constitutional guarantees. "I personally don't believe the dogs are necessary at this time," said Perez, who has a nephew at Isbell School. "I have concerns about drugs anywhere, but I'd like to look for other methods to deter this problem." Perez has found an ally in the Ventura County chapter of the League of United Latin American Citizens, a nationally renowned civil rights organization that last month urged the district to withdraw the policy. "Innocent kids are being asked to leave the room and, by that action, almost being accused of something they have not done," said David Rodriguez, the local chapter's representative. "What really bothers me is the message this is sending to kids: 'You're in middle school and we don't trust you.' " But as far as Misenhimer is concerned, it's not a question of trust as much as it is an obligation for student safety. At the start of the school year, she said, six students were expelled for drug-related offenses. But during the time the dogs were on campus, she said, there were few drug-related problems. "We need to do everything we can to save our children," she said. "We're supposed to be a safe place, that's what the law says. I don't feel we can be totally there unless we can use every means possible to keep kids safe." Rights: Critics say the searches violate students' privacy. Principal defends the policy as a necessary safety measure. Source: Los Angeles Times (CA)Author: Fred Alvarez, Times Staff WriterPublished: Sunday, March 18, 2001 Copyright: 2001 Los Angeles TimesAddress: Times Mirror Square, Los Angeles, CA 90053Fax: (213) 237-4712Contact: letters latimes.comWebsite: http://www.latimes.com/Related Articles: Ban On Drug-Sniffing Dogs Doesn’t Exist http://cannabisnews.com/news/5/thread5439.shtmlConcerned Parents Turn to Drug-Sniffing Dogshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/5/thread5288.shtml END SNIP --> Snipped Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help Comment #1 posted by dddd on March 19, 2001 at 05:10:04 PT Whose "problem" is it? Here is another case of using a fabricated problem,as an excuse to doabsurd things....This guy says;>"When students go to school, they give up certain rights," Grant said.So in other words,if you dont want to give up your rights,then dont go toschool.????The drug war fiasco,has conjured up an unjustified,and mythical "problem",whichhas become accepted as factual,but in the actual world of reality,the "problem",iscomparable to something like a problem with stupidness,and all the problems stupidpeople cause,and stupid peoples kids are another major problem.No one has never been stupid.....I am proud to admit that I am quite often sorta stupid,,but now that I admit that,,,I cant really blame anyone else for being stupid,,,so it'skinda stupid for me to keep writing stupid comments,critisizing others who are stupid,and are doing stupid things in the name of a drug war,,the only difference between meand them,is that I admit that I can be stupid,and if someone points out my stupidity,Iam not stupid enough to at least listen,and consider my own stupidity problem.Peoplewho refuse to admit that they have never been,or done anything stupid,are an excellentexample of a definition of the term.......... [ Post Comment ] Post Comment Name: Optional Password: E-Mail: Subject: Comment: [Please refrain from using profanity in your message] Link URL: Link Title: