The Policy & Personnel Committee reviewed proposed revisions to the Port Washington Union Free School Districtode of Character, Culture and Conduct, focusing on alignment of harassment and discrimination definitions, the dress code
nd how enforcement will be explained in school handbooks.

Committee members asked administrators to choose a single, consistent definition of "discrimination" to use across the code and related stand-alone policies (student harassment and bullying prevention). The committee directed staff to compare the district raft with the model NISPA language and return a recommendation on which definition should prevail so the code and the stand-alone policies use consistent terminology.

The committee spent extended time on dress-code language, particularly a provision on head coverings. Principals and faculty reported differing practices across elementary schools: some allow hats at elementary, middle schools generally prohibit hats and high schools are permissive. Some committee members urged a consistent prohibition at the elementary level to match middle school practice; others warned that removing hat allowances could single out students who wear hats for medical or personal reasons and increase conflict in some elementary buildings. After discussion the committee agreed to remove the detailed hat provision from the district-level policy and to add a clear reference instructing families to consult individual school handbooks for building-specific rules. The committee emphasized that medical exceptions would remain permitted and that individual school handbooks should align with board policy.

On harassment and bullying policy, administrators and trustees flagged sections of the proposed regulation that assign responsibilities to the board where those responsibilities belong to administrators. The committee directed counsel to reconcile regulation text so that operational duties are in regulations and policy language reflects board responsibilities. Members also questioned a suggested annual review clause in the harassment policy; attorneys advised that the harassment policy is not statutorily required to be reviewed annually and the committee asked counsel to revise or remove language that inappropriately requires annual review.

The committee did not adopt final text at the meeting. It directed staff and legal counsel to refine the discrimination definition alignment, adjust regulations so administrative duties are properly placed, insert handbook cross-references for dress-code variations (head coverings), and return the revised code and related policies to the committee for subsequent action and a recommendation to the full board.