CITY OFFICIALS CONSIDER NEW DRUG TEST POLICY

Nicholasville's Officials Are Considering Changes To The City's Employee
Drug Testing Policy.

Last week, consultant Paul Combs talked with the mayor and commissioners
about a plan to create a stricter policy that would resemble the one
already in place for the police department and certified driver's license
(CDL) employees.

The policy would involve periodic random testing for drugs and alcohol for
all employees, as well as guidelines for reporting employees suspected of
being intoxicated, and testing them.

Tests would be conducted for reasonable suspicion and anytime an employee
has an accident. If there was a positive test, or if an employee refused to
take a test, he would be suspended from work without pay until he is
cleared to come back by a substance abuse professional, Combs said.

If a person tested positive the second time, he would be fired.

"This is basically taking the federal policy and applying it," Combs said.

He added that in three years, he has never had a city government say no to
implementing such a policy.

But there were plenty of concerns at the city commission meeting Thursday.

Commissioner Russ Meyer said he thought it was a little too harsh to not
pay the employee while he is receiving treatment when his family depends on
his income. But Combs countered that it would be unfair to other employees
for one to get a month off work with pay for "smoking a joint."

Meyer also asked if the alcohol testing would prevent employees from
drinking while off the job. Combs said that if the test results were
between .01 and .02, there would be no problem. An employee shouldn't drink
any alcohol four hours before coming to work or if he is on call, he said.

For illegal drugs, the city could adopt a "no tolerance policy," Combs
said, but added, "we're not recommending that; it wouldn't be fair."

Mayor John Martin pointed out that the police have a no tolerance policy.
"If they take an illegal drug, they're gone," he said.

City Clerk Roberta Warren wanted it to be possible for an employee who has
a drug problem and wants to seek treatment to own up to it without being
punished.

"I think we need to have an open door policy," she said.

Combs agreed that there should be such a provision.

Gerald Deeken, a local businessman in the audience, thought the proposed
drug policy was too harsh, too expensive, and probably unnecessary.

"Is there a problem with drug abuse?" he asked.

Martin said there wasn't.

Deeken pointed out that at $30 to $45 per test for 200 employees, it would
cost $6,000 to $9,000 a year even if they were tested only once.

He was also concerned that the plan did not address confidentiality. Martin
said there were confidentiality provisions in the original draft of the
plan, but they were taken out.

After some discussion, the commission decided to restore the
confidentiality requirement.

Another issue was whether the policy ought to apply to elected city
officials. City Attorney Arvin pointed out that if it did, there would be
no way to enforce it. The city commission can't punish or dismiss one of
its own elected members.