Report Urges Drug Tests for County Employees : Grand Jury: Many officials call the recommendation unnecessary and intrusive. They support counseling and treatment programs.

The Ventura County Grand Jury has recommended mandatory random drug and alcohol testing for county employees, estimating that 18% to 20% may have substance-abuse problems.

But the recommendation got a lukewarm reception Thursday from representatives of many county departments. Only one, Dist. Atty. Michael D. Bradbury, said he supports such testing.

“I would like to see all public officials take drug tests, if nothing else, to set some examples,” Bradbury said. “As far as I’m concerned, the county’s gone way too slow and, if they don’t get off the dime, I’m going to unilaterally start a drug-testing program for all new hires.”

Most county department representatives called mandatory testing unnecessary and intrusive.

None could remember any county employee being fired in recent years because of drug use. And they said few employees have sought treatment in county counseling programs for alcoholism and drug use.

The department representatives predicted that compulsory on-demand testing would offend and drive away qualified applicants and good employees who would be embarrassed by being forced to submit blood or urine samples. The Sheriff’s Department is the only county department that conducts drug testing, and then only for people applying to become deputies.

They recommended that the county instead keep offering treatment and counseling to anyone whose substance abuse is affecting their job.

And most scoffed at the Grand Jury’s estimate of the number of drug and alcohol abusers employed by the county. Based on the Grand Jury report, between 1,080 and 1,200 of the county’s 6,000 employees could be drug abusers.

“With my experience with the deputy sheriffs, I’m relatively sure we don’t have an 18% substance-abuse problem, or anything like that,” Assistant Sheriff Oscar Fuller said.

Fuller said he sees no purpose in randomly testing present employees.

“I personally don’t have any objection because I don’t have anything to worry about,” he said. “But it seems to suggest that you have some reservations about the integrity of your employees without any demonstrable reason. . . . I think it’s like somebody asking you to take an oath every other week when you’ve already taken an oath.”

The 1989-90 Grand Jury issued its report Wednesday, 2 1/2 weeks after it closed its yearlong session.

The report said: “National averages, when applied to Ventura County, suggest that 20% of both county employees and their family members may be substance abusers.”

In addition to mandatory drug testing for county employees, the Grand Jury recommended anti-drug abuse education for county inmates, more education for students and tougher penalties for drug and alcohol offenders.

The report also quoted Ron Komers, director of the county Personnel Office, who has estimated that 18% of county employees abuse drugs or alcohol. Komers said he considered federal estimates that from 10% to 23% of the national work force suffers from drug or alcohol abuse and estimates quoted in a private study. He said he also took into account that the county has a conservative, law-and-order atmosphere.

Komers said employee assistance programs are counseling 200 county employees at a time for family or personal problems--about 12% of whom have a drug or alcohol problem.

But he said he would rather continue counseling employees for problems that contribute to their addictions, instead of making them submit to tests.

“The focus should not be punitive,” Komers said. “The reason I’m opposed to it is I believe it’s not cost-effective in addressing the problem.”

“There was a time when I felt strongly that it was a good idea,” Sheila Gonzalez, executive officer of the Ventura County courts, said of mandatory random testing.

Now “my preference would be for us to offer education and access to treatment rather than mandatory drug testing, or if there were drug testing, that it be only for new employees. It’s the government moving into your personal life--Big Brother.”

Stephen Kingsford, assistant county schools superintendent, noted that the nation’s courts have not supported random drug testing except in occupations where lives could be threatened if employees are incapacitated by drugs or alcohol. Pilots and nuclear plant employees have been among those randomly tested.

“The courts have usually required that there be some probable cause for drug testing, and that’s the position we’ve taken,” Kingsford said.

“There has to be some behavior that indicates somebody is dealing with a substance, and it has to be affecting their job” before the employee would be forced to take a substance test, he said.