Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Policy 2 27 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Policy committee restarts first reading of controlled-substances policy, debates suspension discretion and equity
Summary
At a first reading of Policy 2.27, administrators said the policy text is unchanged but ARs will define consequences; committee members queried off-campus jurisdiction, suspension ranges (up to 10 days in AR), and equity risks from principal discretion.
The Wallingford-Swarthmore School District Policy Committee reopened Policy 2.27 (controlled substances) as a first reading, with administration saying the policy language is unchanged from earlier drafts and that the accompanying administrative regulation (AR) will set disciplinary consequences.
Speaker 3, who presented the policy, said definitions in the draft "track the definitions in state law" and that the AR will outline consequences. When Speaker 1 asked about language applying the policy to conduct off student property, Speaker 3 explained the first paragraph covers school-program-related conduct that may occur off campus and the third paragraph reserves jurisdiction "to the extent that there are any other times when we can exercise our jurisdiction," noting that courts have narrowed some extraterritorial discipline in recent years.
Discussion turned to consequences. Speaker 1 noted the AR allows suspensions "for up to 10 days" for a first offense and asked how principals decide between shorter suspensions and the maximum. Speaker 3 said discipline varies by school level and the type of infraction (paraphernalia vs. possession), and that principals often prefer some flexibility. Speaker 2 raised equity concerns, saying, "a Black student could get a 7 day suspension for having a rolled joint ... and a white student can have the same thing and only gets a day indoor suspension." Speaker 3 replied that the district's equity policy sets a framework for equitable administration and pointed to an AR on discipline that the committee will see next month.
Speaker 1 also requested clarification of "instructive possession" (constructive possession); Speaker 3 said it covers control of an item not physically on a student—for example, directing another person or hiding an item out of sight while retaining control.
No formal adoption occurred; the committee will review the AR with discipline details next month.
