School board sniffs out legal issue on drug searches
Whether the return of drug-sniffing dogs to La Cañada High School would affect a culture change on campus or potentially muddle issues surrounding students’ constitutional rights to privacy was deeply discussed Tuesday by local school officials.
Supt. Wendy Sinnette said high school administrators requested the district resume the practice — halted in 2010 after a parent complained it violated students’ rights — to prevent students from bringing drugs — marijuana in particular — onto campus.
Although LCUSD revised its board policy on canine searches in the wake of that complaint, bringing the district more in compliance with students’ 5th Amendment rights, Sinnette said legal counsel recently suggested the language could be even more explicit.
“This policy language meets the legal standards,” she told the board. “Do we want to be more explicit or not?”
What followed was a discussion on the merits and murkiness of canine searches, and how students should be notified of an upcoming search.
Board Vice President Andrew Blumenfeld said he saw drug-sniffing dogs as a way to disrupt the comfort level students have with possessing drugs and bringing them to school, as opposed to a means of apprehending offenders.
“If there’s a feeling that there’s too casual a relationship between our students and drugs… having drug-sniffing dogs on campus, having them walk through classrooms, will definitely address that at its core,” he said.
Board President Ellen Multari admitted to being conflicted about whether apprehension was a key component of effective prevention, and said she was leery of informing students of a search up front.
“I do know, as the parent of a high school student, the usage of drugs on campus does seem to be growing,” Multari said. “But sometimes you can’t prevent what you don’t apprehend.”
Board member David Sagal was in favor of telling students up front before a canine search is to occur to avoid a perception in the community that the district is neglecting to inform kids of their rights. His board colleague Kaitzer Puglia said she wanted to create opportunities for teachers, parents and students to expressly discuss the matter throughout the school year.
Member Dan Jeffries asked about the real need for canine searches, saying the practice seemed over the top unless there was a real drug problem at LCHS. Either way, he added, students should be made aware of their rights.
“If you felt the school or the Sheriff’s Department had a particular need to do it, it might be one thing, but at this point, it seems our policy is that we want to make sure we protect the rights and privacy of the kids,” Jeffries said.
In 2010, La Cañada Unified was called on the carpet after a parent and longtime federal public defender learned the district had sent drug-sniffing dogs onto campus unannounced.
According to a Valley Sun article, students were told to leave their backpacks and other belongings behind in the classroom and were taken to another location while the dogs sniffed their personal items.
The parent called the district’s search-and-seizure policy poorly crafted, and board members agreed. In 2011, LCUSD’s board policy — and administrative regulations dictating how policies should be followed — was clarified.
Sinnette said further clarifying policies and regulations to tell staff how to ensure students’ 5th Amendment rights are upheld would further protect the district from any perceived violations.
The board directed Sinnette to talk more with legal counsel and return with language for discussion and possible future approval at an upcoming board meeting. Jeffries requested information and evidence on the efficacy of using drug-sniffing dogs as a drug-prevention method.
