Page 2
The INDEPENDENT, February 8,1995
ixlRDEPENDENT
I
WH atoio
^ % 'u u rT H e
Serving the upper Nehalem River valley. Published
twice monthly on the second and fourth Wednesdays of
each month, by Public Opinion Laboratory Ltd., 1206
S tate A venue, V ernonia, OR 97064, as a fre e
new spaper. E ditors and Publishers, Dirk & Noni
Andersen, (503) 429-9410.
lot
re¿ r
Drug policy harms
the school system
When Vernonia School District started its manda
tory suspicionless drug testing policy in 1989, it took
only a short while before the district started amend
ing it.
First it was changed to eliminate automatic dis
qualification from extracurricular activities in the
event a student had two positive urine tests. Then it
was amended so it applied only to students who
were involved in extracurricular athletic programs.
The changes didn’t occur haphazardly; the first
was callously calculated to reduce potential liability
of the district and the board of directors, after they
were warned about that possibility. The second
change was adopted because another school district
had been able to support “protection of athletes” as a
reason for a similar (not the same) policy.
Then, the most interesting change of all occurred.
At the time the policy was initiated, the justification
given by the district was that drug use, or drug-affect
ed students, disrupted classrooms so severely that
the teachers couldn’t do their jobs adequately. But,
after talking to many different legal authorities, the
justification suddenly became the protection of stu
dent-athletes.
It was the same policy, applied to the same
students, in the same school, by the same adminis
tration. Nevertheless, when it appeared that the dis
trict or the directors could be held liable, they very
cynically “changed” the policy by adopting - after the
fact - a different justification for its inception.
At that point, the policy was no longer designed to
quell classroom disruptions; it somehow became a
“protective” system on the basis that drug-affected
athletes could be injured or injure others in their al
tered state.
The district accepted their own rationale so com
pletely that Superintendent Ellis Mason even testi
fied, under oath, that the policy was started to protect
athletes. When asked about that statement, he re
sponded, “Well, that’s what it became.”
Another interesting point is the claim in the trial
brief that Vernonia is a “small, isolated logging com
munity of approximately 3,000” people. Attornies
aren’t generally noted for their creative writing skills,
but that opening statement about the isolation of a
town just 40 miles from a major metropolitan area
shows that some attornies are frustrated fiction writ
ers.
The population figure also seems to have been the
figment of someone’s imagination. At the time the
brief was written, the combined population of the
town and the surrounding areas was closer to 7,000
than 3,000.
In Vernonia, some professional educators have vi
olated their students civil rights; some blithely disre
gard the truth and entirely too many support impos
ing “order” under the shameful dictum that the end
justifies the means.
There is no justification for the example set here.
»
*
oh TT& y m
.A
.A J
b
Y«“
J xÿ
W
To
a
WAY.ow! ote»
7 A U Æ T IO a J THAT" YOU
'ÇTene PAftKCÛ ôa J MX fooT?J
wvrcR via
¿QfliTflcT roui
'P ie J o s lR e p o rt
By Rep. TimJosi
Oregon House District 2
Among the important topics to be discussed
in this legislative session is the health of our
watersheds, the management of this resource
for the future, and how we can participate in
this process.
It may seem too obvious to state, but with
out water there is no life and without a stable
watershed system providing a clean and de
pendable water supply, our Northwest lifestyle
is in jeopardy. We depend on water for con
sumption at home and work, for generation of
hydro-electric power, for agricultural and in
dustrial purposes, and for the sustenance of
our wildlife.
During the last decade, Oregonians real
ized that our watersheds were deteriorating.
We share responsibility for this through in
creased consumption of water due to a rapidly
growing population, agricultural and hydro
electric demands, logging practices, the devel
opm ent of roads and other structures too
close to stream beds, and the drainage of in
dustrial waste into our water supplies.
One of the most obvious signs of this dete
rioration has been the decline of wild Pacific
salmon populations. In 1991, the American
Fisheries Society found that of 400 distinct
salmon stocks on the West Coast, 214 were at
risk of extinction and 106 were already extinct.
Ocean catches of coho declined from 5.3 mil
lion in 1976 to 292,000 in 1993, according to
the National Marine Fisheries Service. Listing
of the coho as an endangered species is con
sidered to be imminent.
In response to this widespread problem, the
legislature created the Strategic Water Man
agement Group (SWMG) in 1985 to coordi
nate local, state and federal agencies dealing
with water policy. In 1987 the Governor’s Wa
tershed Enhancement Board (GWEB) was
formed to provide grants for enhancing water
shed health or creating educational programs
to gather data on watersheds and to commu
nicate the importance of watershed health.
The Board has been particularly interested in
individual projects. When HB 2215 passed in
1993, a program was established that encour
ages local, state, and federal agencies to work
with private citizens to restore our ailing water-
sheds through formation of local watershed
councils. Council action projects may receive
grant funds from SWMG.
W atershed cou ncils th a t have alrea dy
formed around the state have a variety of his
tories. Some councils have been initiated by
county governments that asked citizens to
participate in council formation; others have
been created by interested groups of citizens
concerned about the quality of their water
sheds. All councils, regardless of their begin
nings, must receive official recognition from
their county government in order to receive
state technical assistance and possible fund
ing. Once local governm ent approves the
council members then the state Strategic Wa
ter Management Group either confirms or re
quests changes in the council membership.
One reason for the state oversight is to pro
vide a balanced perspective in the develop
ment of watershed policy for each area. That
requires representation from watershed resi
dents with agricultural, industrial, governmen
tal, recreational, propietary and/or environ
mental interests.
Many councils also have technical and ad
visory members that help research, compile
and interpret data on the direction of the coun
cil. These members represent federal, state
and local governm ents and are extrem ely
valuable for their ability to provide leadership
in a variety of ways and for information on
compliance with existing law.
The councils pull together to create a man
agement plan for their watersheds. These can
include pollution control, riparian enhance
ment, revegetation/erosion control, fisheries
enhancement, training and education pro
grams, and water conservation projects. The
ultimate goal is to improve the overall health
of the watershed for the benefit of all groups.
I want to help in watershed council forma
tion in any way I can. If you are interested in
being invoked in this process, contact my of
fice in Salem for further information.
Rep. Josi may be reached at:
State Capitol Room H491
Salem, OR 97310
Phone: (503)986-1402
FAX: (503)986-1575
E-Mail: RepJosi America On Line