Perkiomen Valley committee debates library selection rules, aligns internet policy updates

The Perkiomen Valley School District policy committee considered state-recommended updates to the district’s acceptable‑use policy and heard more than two hours of public comment on a separate proposal that would change how the district selects and restricts library and other resource materials.

Doctor Russell, a district administrator, told the committee the Pennsylvania School Boards Association’s Policy Network News proposed revised language for policy 815, the district’s acceptable‑use policy for Internet and network access, and that administration recommended adopting the PSBA wording to clarify which online materials students may not access. ‘‘Administration is recommending the language in PSBA’s version of 815,’’ Doctor Russell said during the meeting.

Why it matters: Policy 815 governs district filtering and access on school networks; any mismatch between what the Internet filters and what library collections contain could create contradictions for students and parents. Committee members and community speakers repeatedly raised the possibility that restrictive Internet filters could block legitimate research while library policies allow the same materials for curricular or research use.

Public focus moved quickly to Policy 109 (Resource Materials). The draft presented to the committee adds a sentence instructing that a book containing an image the district would define as pornographic or otherwise impermissible should not remain in the library, even if the rest of the work is judged to have educational value. Several committee members and library professionals urged a different approach. Doctor Weston, a committee member, said federal and state tests for material ‘‘harmful to minors’’ require assessing a work as a whole and cautioned against disqualifying an entire work because of one image.

Multiple public speakers asked for concrete selection safeguards. Debbie Leonetti said she had checked commercial book listings and argued parents and staff could use bookstore ratings as a preliminary filter: ‘‘If any book is rated on a Barnes and Noble website over 17, it should not be in our library,’’ she said. Others urged that librarians consult multiple reputable review sources before acquisition; administration said it would discuss adding a ‘‘three‑source’’ check to selection guidance and report back to the committee.

On shelving and access, speakers suggested housing challenged titles in a restricted professional stack or behind the desk so that older students with demonstrated need could request them without broad availability to younger students. Administration said an existing administrative regulation allows parents to opt their child out of checking out a challenged book and agreed to discuss options with librarians about age labeling and alternative access procedures.

What’s next: Doctor Russell said administration will consult with librarians about the proposed three‑reference guidance and the practicality of a professional or restricted stack, then return with language for the committee’s consideration and a potential first reading at the February board meeting.

Community reaction was mixed: some parents said the district must protect younger students from sexually explicit images, citing state statutes and federal standards; librarians and other educators warned that an overly broad rule risks removing valuable works and shifting selection from educators to ad hoc community judgments.

The committee did not take a formal vote on Policy 109; members asked administration to return with clarified language and evidence about how drafts and proposed edits will appear in public attachments moving forward.