Municipal, Land Use & Zoning

By: Amanda Sundquist

On November 9, 2011, the “Safety in Youth Sports Act” was signed into law.  The Act addresses concussion and head injury risks for student athletes and the education of the coaching staff.

School districts have new parent notification obligations under the Act.  Prior to participation of a student athlete in an athletic activity, the student and his or her parent/guardian shall receive a concussion and traumatic brain injury information sheet and must return a signed acknowledgment of receipt.  School districts may elect to hold informational meetings prior to the start of each athletic season regarding concussions and other head injuries.

Coaches are required to complete a concussion management certification training course once a year to be able to coach athletic activities. The Act also contains standards regarding removal from play and return to play for students athletes. School districts are required to establish minimum penalties for coaches who fail to comply with the removal from play and return to play requirements.

The Safety in Youth Sports Act will go into effect July 1, 2012.    If you require assistance developing policies and forms relating your school district’s obligations under this new Act, please contact Amanda Sundquist in our West Chester office.

Amanda J. Sundquist

Amanda Sundquist is an associate at Unruh, Turner, Burke and Frees. Amanda practices in the areas of Pennsylvania Municipal and School Law, and Pennsylvania Zoning and Land Use Law. The firm maintains law offices in Malvern, Phoenixville, and West Chester Pennsylvania which serve the Main Line, and many surrounding communities such as Devon, Exton, West Chester, Ardmore and others.

By: Amanda Sundquist

Following up on its recent guidance on bullying and harassment, on June 14, 2011 the Office for Civil Rights (“OCR”) issued a “Dear Colleagues” letter regarding the impact of the Equal Access Act (the “Act”) on gay-straight alliances (GSA) and similar student-initiated groups addressing LGBT issues. OCR reminds school districts that the Act applies to these student-initiated noncurricular groups as well.

Enacted in 1984, the Equal Access Act applies to public secondary schools that receive federal funding. If the school allows one or more noncurricular student groups to meet on its premises during noninstructional time, it has created a limited open forum and must comply with the Act. Schools may not then deny similar access to other noncurricular student groups based of the subject matter the group addresses. Also included with the “Dear Colleagues” letter are Legal Guidelines Regarding the Equal Access Act and the Recognition of Student-Led Noncurricular Groups. These guidelines address the scope of the Act, the school’s legal obligations, and issues that may arise when applying the Act.

For assistance in reviewing or developing your school district’s Equal Access Act policy or in answering questions regarding limited open forums, curriculum related groups, or other issues arising from the Act, please contact me in our West Chester office.

Amanda J. Sundquist

Amanda Sundquist is an associate at Unruh, Turner, Burke and Frees. Amanda practices in the areas of Pennsylvania Municipal and School Law, and Pennsylvania Zoning and Land Use Law. The firm maintains law offices in Malvern, Phoenixville, and West Chester Pennsylvania which serve the Main Line, and many surrounding communities such as Devon, Exton, West Chester, Ardmore and others.

By: Amanda J. Sundquist

In Trefelner v. Burrell School District, the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania issued a temporary restraining order to compel a school district to permit a parochial school student to participate in extracurricular activities offered by the school district, including marching and jazz bands. Pennsylvania’s Public School Code (“School Code”) permits home schooled students or, in certain situations, students who attend charter schools to participate in extracurricular activities offered by their school district of residence.

In Trefelner, the Court analyzed the student’s claim under the Free Exercise Clause framework. The Court found given the secular exemptions created by the School Code and the lack of similar religious exemptions, the student may be able to demonstrate that the school district’s extracurricular activity policy was not neutral and that it was not narrowly tailored to advance compelling interests. The Court issued a temporary restraining order. While Trefelner was ultimately settled by agreement between student and the school district, the issuance by the Court of the temporary restraining order indicates that courts may be willing to consider participation in public school activities by parochial school students.

If your school district requires assistance updating its extracurricular activities policy or addressing issues relating to the participation in extracurricular activities by home schooled, charter school, or other students, please contact Amanda Sundquist.

By: Daniel P. Dwyer

A United States Supreme Court decision issued on June 25 clarified an issue that may be of interest to school districts. The issue is: what constitutes a reasonable search of a student when a school employee has a reasonable suspicion that the student may have narcotics or other contraband on her person. The Court’s discussion of an Arizona public school’s strip search of a middle school student who was suspected of distributing prescription drugs is summarized below.

In Safford Unified School District #1, et al. v. Redding, the mother of a 13-year old middle school student sued her local school district, an Assistant Principal, the school nurse and an administrative assistant because they ordered or participated in a search of her daughter that included: 1) a search of the student’s bag; 2) a search of the student’s outer clothes, and; 3) a search that required the student to strip-down to her underclothes and turn them out in a manner that allowed a limited view of her breasts and pelvic area. The mother claimed that the search violated her daughter’s 4th Amendment protection against unreasonable search and seizure. The Supreme Court held that, although the first two parts of the search were appropriate under the circumstances, the third “strip search” violated the student’s constitutional rights.

The search was unconstitutional because it was not, “ … reasonably related in scope to the circumstances that justified the [search] in the first place.” The Assistant Principal knew that the contraband in question was prescription strength ibuprofen and an over-the-counter pain reliever. The search was not reasonable related to the justification for the search because, “… non-dangerous contraband does not raise the specter of stashes in intimate places” and there were no circumstances present here, either in the form of known practices or statements of other students, that suggested that such a search might be fruitful.

In conclusion, this decision recognizes that school searches may be justified by a lower level of suspicion than criminal searches but that the appropriateness of a search may differ with the age and gender of the student. Furthermore, with reasonable suspicion, searches of bags and pockets are not unreasonable. However, as the search becomes more intrusive (again, considering age and gender), actors must have suspicions of a dangerous threat and a factual basis for deciding that the search may yield contraband.
For more information about how this decision may impact your school district’s search policies and procedures or your student’s rights, please contact our office.

The new Right-to-Know Act became effective January 1, 2009.  Information pertaining to the Act can be found at the Office of Open Records’ website http://openrecords.state.pa.us/. This law may impact your municipality, school district or government agency.  For assistance in implementing this new law, please contact our office.