The Upper Dublin School District policy committee reviewed proposed revisions to Policy 3.17, “Conduct and Disciplinary Procedures,” focused on language required by educator‑misconduct law and notification requirements from the state Department of Education.

Committee members questioned whether the draft, which leans heavily on educator‑specific language, properly covers non‑certificated staff or should be split into separate educator and non‑educator policies. "It felt very educator focused and some of it I would think would still apply to non educators," committee member Jenna said, urging clarity about which provisions apply only to certificated staff and which apply districtwide.

District staff explained that many elements of the draft stem from the statutory framework governing educator misconduct and related reporting and investigation requirements. "For educator misconduct specifically, it is really [misconduct] heavy," a staff member said, noting the draft follows statutory language.

Members also flagged the policy's section on immunity from civil liability for good‑faith reporters. Several committee members said the committee should avoid broad, definitive statements about civil immunity in district policy and should instead emphasize the district's protections against retaliation. "I generally don't love when we talk in our policies about whether somebody is legally immune from civil liability," one committee member said, adding that the district can promise not to take retaliatory action but cannot guarantee the actions of private parties.

There was also discussion about notification language that says the superintendent "may receive notice from the Department of Education" when an educator has a pending arrest record; members asked for clearer, policy‑centric wording that explains what the district will do when it receives such notifications.

The committee did not adopt final language during the meeting. Staff agreed to review the draft for cross‑policy consistency (definitions of abuse, exploitation and misconduct appear in other district policies) and to consider revising or relocating sweeping immunity language before the next policy meeting.

The committee closed discussion on Policy 3.17 and moved on to other agenda items without a formal vote recorded on the draft.