Judge Orders City to Scale Back Drug Testing : Employment: The policy was the most wide-ranging in the state. Screening will continue for about 80% of job applicants.

A judge has ruled that the city of Glendale must scale back its sweeping drug testing policy, which required screening of all job applicants and all candidates for promotion.

Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Ernest G. Williams ruled last Friday that such testing violates an individual’s constitutional right to privacy and can only be justified for certain jobs.

Specifically, Williams said drug testing was appropriate for prospective law enforcement officers, people who would be entrusted with the public safety and people who would have access to large amounts of money.

American Civil Liberties Union attorney Marvin Krakow called the decision a partial victory because the judge “recognized the privacy concern and recognized that the city had been over broad in its efforts to test everyone.” But Krakow said Williams’ ruling is still “too permissive” and “allows the government to overstep its rightful authority.” He said the ACLU probably will appeal.

In practice, the decision allows Glendale to continue drug testing for about 80% of its job applicants, Senior Assistant City Atty. Ron R. Braden said.

Nearly all candidates for positions in the city’s Public Works Division and the Public Service Division--except those seeking positions as custodians or clerks--can be tested, Braden said. The city will also be allowed to test applicants for any job with the police or fire departments.

However, Williams ordered Glendale to cease testing applicants for jobs in the city attorney’s office, the planning division, the personnel division, the redevelopment agency, the library staff or the city manager’s office, Braden said.

Since August, 1986, Glendale has required all job applicants and all candidates for promotion to submit to a urinalysis to screen for the presence of 10 controlled substances. No other California city requires drug tests of all job applicants, Krakow said.

The policy was challenged by Lorraine Loder, a Glendale resident and attorney, with the support of the ACLU. Although Loder never sought city employment, she was allowed to press the case as a taxpayer with a vested interest in city practices.

Williams’ decision is expected to be signed, and to take effect, after a final hearing on May 18, attorneys in the case said.

The ruling will not be binding on other cities. But Krakow said he hopes that the decision will deter officials in other municipalities from adopting such broad testing policies.

“To the extent that it may be considered by other cities and towns, it may have a persuasive effect,” the ACLU attorney said.

However, Braden called the ruling “very strange,” noting that as part of a health exam for all prospective employees, the city already requires urinalysis to check for a variety of health problems.

“We can conduct tests to find out about all kinds of health conditions, but as soon as we test that for illegal use of drugs, that’s unconstitutional,” he said.

Braden said Glendale officials still want to test all job candidates for drug use, but he said he does not know if the City Council will instruct him to appeal the ruling.

Krakow said an appellate ruling on the matter would be legally binding on other trial courts.