State Board of Education officials expect to encounter vocal opposition next month when they take up a proposal to allow locker searches and the use of drug-sniffing dogs on school campuses statewide.

But even as the American Civil Liberties Union, legal experts, some principals and students express concern over the proposed revisions to the schools' disciplinary code, board members say they expect the proposal will pass when taken up by the full board at a yet-to-be-scheduled meeting.

At the request of the state attorney general's office, the board is considering searches "with or without cause" and the use of drug detection canines on public school campuses, said board member Mary Cochran, whose committee on Monday gave preliminary approval to the Chapter 19 disciplinary code changes.

Previously, the panel backed away from "without cause" searches. But following an executive session discussion with the attorney general's office, the committee decided in a majority vote to reinstate the language.

Four members of the 11-member panel voted against the change.

"While I don't necessarily have a problem with the dogs being on campus, when you say we can search a locker without cause, I just have some concern about that phrase and what it could imply," said Karen Knudsen, chairwoman of the state BOE.

Knudsen, Kim Coco Iwamoto, Garrett Toguchi and Lei Ahu Isa voted against the disciplinary code changes.

The proposal will now move on to the full 14-member board for approval at an upcoming meeting.

Three Maui County schools allowed drug-sniffing dogs on campus in a five-month pilot program in the first half of this year. Officials said the program was generally well-received. Two O'ahu private schools, Saint Louis and Academy of the Pacific, have also used drug-sniffing dogs for several years.

Jon Van Dyke, a professor with the University of Hawai'i's William S. Richardson School of Law, said locker searches and drug-sniffing dogs would be an infringement on student privacy rights and would be "a step in the wrong direction."

Van Dyke, who is co-author of "Checklists for Searches and Seizures in Public Schools," a guide used by school districts nationwide, said that under the state's constitution, the government must have a compelling interest to limit privacy.

He also noted that previous versions of Chapter 19, the state Department of Education's disciplinary code, contained "rules that there is an expectation of privacy" for students.

"You have to have some evidence that some specific person is violating the law or a school rule before conducting a search," Van Dyke said.

Cochran, who had previously supported the removal of the "without cause" clause, said she now supports it, believing that students don't have an expectation of privacy when using a school locker.

Lois Perrin, legal director at the American Civil Liberties Union of Hawai'i, said the ACLU continues to monitor the board's effort to change the disciplinary code and noted that the organization opposes locker searches, dog sniffs and rules about cyberbullying.

"Students do not check their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse door," Perrin said.

Michael Nakano, the principal at Lahainaluna High School, where drug-sniffing dogs were used, said the pilot project was well-received by parents and students.

"The reason we wanted the dogs here was because we wanted a safe and secure campus," he said. "It was a deterrent, a preventative measure."

Davin Sakamoto, a senior at Waipahu High School, said he doesn't object to locker searches or the use of drug-sniffing dogs.

"I think the only reason people would oppose it would be if they have something to hide," he said.

However, his classmate Dongie Agnir said he wouldn't be comfortable with the proposed changes.

"It sounds to me like an invasion of privacy. I think if they can do it without cause, that would be very invasive," he said.

Reach Loren Moreno at lmoreno@honoluluadvertiser.com.