RV says "no" to random drug testing policy

Royal Valley USD 337 will not be moving forward with the development of a random student drug testing policy at this time.

After a 45-minute discussion on the topic Monday evening, Royal Valley Board of Education members voted 5-2 against having administrators begin drafting a policy that would allow the district to conduct random drug testing on students. 

Board members Jeff Stithem and Ann Kelly voted in favor of a drug-testing plan, while members Pat Tuck, Cindy Broxterman, Boone Smith, Jim O’Toole and Linda Hegemann voted against it. 

Board members were in agreement, however, that there is a problem with drug and alcohol use in the district and that there is a gap between students and parents reporting those issues to staff and administrators. 

Since September, at least one board member has been present at 12 different meetings with district groups (site councils, booster club/after prom committee, pathway advisory committees, parent resource organization, recreation association and parent teacher organization) and Prairie Band Potawatomi members to discuss drug use in the district and ways to address the issue.

“For me, the discussions I took part in revealed that the majority of people definitely think there is an issue in our district,” Stithem said. “I think we have an opportunity to help our student body. I think we can deter kids from making a bad decision. We have an opportunity to do that. One bad decision can affect the rest of their high school and college career.”

Stithem, who presented the idea of developing a random drug testing policy during the summer, admitted that it would take “a lot of work” to create such a policy. 

Kelly agreed.

“If we’ve identified that there is a problem, then it’s our duty to solve that problem,” Kelly said. “Hopefully, we can change kids’ lives.” 

Broxterman said when the policy was first discussed over the summer, she said she didn’t have a problem with it. With talks of additional budgets cuts at the state level, she said she is worried about the price tag of drug testing. Early estimates have shown that the tests could cost the district between $6,000 to $10,000 a year.

“Our governor would like districts to put money directly into the classroom,” Broxterman said. “I think we can do something to help our students without randomly testing them. I think we need to explore other avenues.”

Nearby, Santa Fe Trail and Seaman school districts both have random drug testing policies in place. In both policies, students who participate in extracurricular activities, as well as park a vehicle in the district’s parking lots, are subject to the random drug testing pool.  

Broxterman said that if a student tested positive on a drug test and was punished by being taken off a sports team, it would do more harm that good. 

“That’s a pivotal moment, and research after research states that you need to get them involved and keep them involved in extracurriculars,” Broxterman said. 

Stithem said that the district’s policy could be set up so students with a positive test could still participate in practices but would be unable to compete in games for a certain amount of time. A rehabilitation element could also be included in a  drug testing policy. 

“Using drugs is against the law, and I think the policy can be drafted to get students help if they are caught,” Stithem said. “We can’t turn our heads when there is an issue. It’s our responsibility to help our kids. The cost is almost irrelevant to me.” 

Smith said that throughout the district meetings he attended, he learned from the public that there is drug and alcohol use by students and that parents want to see a solution. 

“There were lots of different opinions, and I don’t have a silver bullet answer at this point. It’s certainly been a good discussion,” Smith said. “I don’t think a random drug testing policy is the right step. I don’t believe that addresses the problem, but I acknowledge that there is a problem.” 

Hegemann said she’s gone “back and forth and back on forth” on whether a random drug testing policy should be implemented at RV. 

“After talking with the community, I can see there is a need for this,” Hegemann said. “There is going to be a lot of work that needs to be done if we decide to develop a policy. I don’t know. I don’t want a kid to fall through the cracks, but if we do something, there has to be some rehabilitation offered. I just think we have our work cut out for us.”

The biggest thing O’Toole said he discovered from the meetings was that students and parents aren’t reporting drug and alcohol incidents to district leaders.  

“There is a gap between administrators and students and parents where they don’t feel that they can approach the school about these issues,” O’Toole said. “I don’t know if people don’t feel safe or if they think there will be some sort of vendetta, but we have incidents that aren’t reported. If we don’t have them reported to us, it’s hard to act on them. To me, drug testing is down the line. I don’t think it will answer the issues. My main concern is the gap between the school and community.”

Tuck also agreed that there needs to be a safer environment for students to report substance abuse in the school.

“At the meetings I went to, I also heard that it’s hard for students to report on someone else,” Tuck said. 

Principals from all three RV schools were present at the meeting, as well as six district patrons. 

Scott Gooderl, a district parent, said he was strongly in favor of a random drug testing policy. 

“It’s not about catching the kid, it’s about deterring a lot of kids that might want to try it,” Gooderl said. “If you turn around two or three kids a year, than it’s well worth it. It doesn’t matter if you catch anybody.”

Another parent, Robert Smith, said he thought that randomly testing students was “a bad idea.” 

“If it’s a positive thing to be involved in a sport, we shouldn’t discourage students from doing that,” Smith said. “School should be a positive place of growth and policing should be done outside of school.”

After board members voted against drafting a random drug testing policy, O’Toole requested that the district’s current drug policies be revisited at the next board meeting, and board members agreed.

“We need to strengthen them, and we need to look at them as a group,” O’Toole said. 

Some board members said they wouldn’t rule out random student drug testing entirely but wanted to explore other ways to address drug use before drafting a policy. 

Superintendent John Rundle agreed to put the district’s drug polices on the agenda for the next meeting, which is scheduled for Monday, Dec. 14.

“I think we just take it one step at a time,” Rundle said. “We can look at what’s available and what other schools might be doing as well.”

Jim Holloman, RVHS principal, said the school currently implements a variety of tools to curb drug and alcohol use.

Drug dogs are used to search the high school lockers, parking lot and the students’ school bags two to three times a year. Students and teachers are not told when the searches are scheduled to take place, it was reported. 

During prom, all students who enter the school gymnasium for after prom activities must take a breathalyzer test. Once the prom ends at the Heritage Hall in Topeka, students have one hour to change clothes and arrive at the gym for after prom before the doors are closed. 

The breathalyzer is administered by the School Resource Officer, which is John Calvert. The district has had a resource officer on staff for 15 years, and the officer serves all three schools.

“Calvert is very accessible to our students, and they are comfortable approaching him with any concerns,” Holloman said. 

If a teacher or administrator has reasonable suspension that a student is using alcohol or drugs while at school, Holloman and the SRO officer are allowed to pull that students aside and search him or her and their bag and locker, it was reported. 

“We’re very discreet and everything is kept confidential,” Holloman said. “I resent the fact that people think Royal Valley has a drug problem. What we have are kids that make bad decisions that go to this school. The teachers and staff do their best to help them.”

During the 2014-2015 school year, the high school reported two incidents of illicit drug use and five incidents of alcohol use that resulted in suspensions, according to Holloman.

In the 2013-2014 school year, there were five incidents of illicit drug use on school grounds and no instances involving alcohol. 

In the 2012-2013 school year, seven instances of illicit drugs and three incidents of alcohol were reported. 

Rundle previously reported that, by law, all Kansas school districts can and are required to conduct random drug tests on transportation employees since they are considered “safety sensitive personnel.”

The district cannot implement random drug testing on teachers or other employees because it is a violation of the fourth amendment, Rundle said. The amendment “prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures and requires any warrant to be judicially sanctioned and supported by probable cause.”

If district administrators have reasonable suspicion that an employee is abusing an illegal substance, however, a drug test can be requested, he said.