ATTACKS CONTINUE ON ZERO TOLERANCE

Attorney In Newport-Mesa's Most Controversial Case And Students Question
School Board's Continued Support Of Policy

NEWPORT-MESA The lawyer in Newport-Mesa's most controversial zero-tolerance
case said Wednesday he is baffled by a school board member's assertion that
the policy works despite new opposition from the American Bar Assn.

"What I think is outrageous is [trustee] Wendy Leece saying [the policy]
works," said attorney David Shores, who successfully represented Ryan
Huntsman in his suit against the Newport-Mesa Unified School District in
1998. "Trampling on someone's civil rights doesn't mean it's working."

Huntsman was transferred halfway through his senior year at Corona del Mar
High School after police found a marijuana pipe in his car.

The new blows in an old fight come after the American Bar Assn. on Monday
passed a resolution at its annual meeting held in San Diego opposing
zero-tolerance policies at schools.

In the district, the policy calls for the immediate suspension and transfer
of any student caught with, or under the influence of, drugs or alcohol.

Although there has been intermittent opposition to the policy for years,
many board members still stand by its effectiveness, as does former school
board member Jim de Boom, who helped write the policy.

"I still support the 4210 [zero-tolerance policy] as a deterrent and equal
proponent of justice," said de Boom, who is also a Daily Pilot columnist.
"It treats everyone the same, if you're an immigrant farmer's child or
president of a company's child."

But Shores said the policy is anything but fair to students.

A Newport Beach resident, Shores has vocally opposed the policy for years,
claiming it does not provide students with due process.

"When I represented Ryan Huntsman, I was told children aren't entitled to
due process -- they leave their rights on the schoolyard steps," he said.

This is something Shores said he could not accept. It has led him to
represent hundreds of students in zero-tolerance cases throughout the
state, he said, including several here in Newport-Mesa.

"What they are saying to our students is that the end justifies the means,"
he said.

Shores further argued that this one-size-fits-all policy is just an easy
out for school officials.

But there is much to be said for not treating students differently, de Boom
countered.

"The [American Bar Assn.] wants to go back to, if you're privileged, you'll
be treated differently than if you're not privileged," de Boom said.
"There's no doubt in my mind it's a deterrent. You take it away, and we'll
see hundreds of kids, literally, have problems."

Students, who have been some of the leading protesters of the policy, say
that is just not true.

"I don't think if the policy was revised, kids would start" using drugs and
alcohol, said Julia Hochner, president of the Student Political Action
Committee at Newport Harbor High School. "And the students '4210-ed,' those
I've talked to, said it didn't change their behavior."

Members of the student committee began questioning the policy last year,
suggesting that students should be offered options, including voluntary
counseling, instead of transfer, which they said did not help a student
with a substance abuse problem.

"The one thing the policy accomplishes by transferring is that someone
[with a problem] doesn't affect the students around them, but then they're
around other students," she said.

Hochner and the Student Political Action Committee plan to approach the
school board again, she said, and ask that they review the policy.

"I think we should look into adopting a policy that doesn't violate
anyone's rights," she said.