Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Student Policy topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board rejects proposed updates to student drug-testing policy after wide stakeholder concerns

Ketchikan Gateway Borough School District Board of Education · January 14, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

After a lengthy public hearing, the board voted 0–7 to reject proposed revisions to BP 5131.61 (district-sponsored student activities ATOD testing). Activities director Kelly Smith and board members cited legal, confidentiality and implementation issues and urged broader stakeholder review, including students.

The Ketchikan Gateway Borough School District board rejected proposed revisions to its student drug-testing policy on Jan. 14 after a public hearing highlighted legal and practical concerns.

Kelly Smith, activities director at Ketchikan High School, told the board the district's current draft is outdated and legally risky in places and that implementation lacks necessary confidentiality safeguards and follow-up resources for students who test positive. Smith urged a comprehensive rewrite involving legal counsel, parents, students and community stakeholders rather than approval of the current revisions.

Smith said the district performed roughly 350 tests in the most recent comparable period and reported about 27 positive results, of which she said 25 were vaping-related and 2 were marijuana. She and others argued that vaping's prevalence, changing state and federal case law, and scarce local treatment resources require rethinking the policy's purpose and process.

Board members also called for wider stakeholder input and student voice; several members said an immediate vote on the revisions would be premature. On roll call, the proposed revisions failed 0–7.

What's next: several board members said the policy should return to the policy committee for a full revision with legal review and stakeholder engagement, including student input and a clear process for confidentiality and referral.