Parents, educators and mental-health experts tell Massapequa board to reverse locker-room policy, warn of legal and mental-health harms

Several parents, educators and mental-health professionals told the Massapequa Board of Education during public comment that a Sept. 9 board resolution restricting students to locker rooms matching their sex assigned at birth violates New York state law, harms transgender students and diverts district funds into litigation.

Those concerns were raised after the board president read public-comment rules and reminded speakers that the board cannot provide immediate feedback during the meeting.

The issue drew extended public comment because speakers said it affects student safety and mental health and because the board has spent or plans to spend district funds on legal challenges. “New York state law explicitly prohibits public schools from preventing a child from using bathrooms and communal changing spaces that align with their gender identity,” said Dr. Jenny Isaacs, identifying herself as a child clinical psychologist, teacher, academic researcher and parent. “When the board made this decision, they broke the law. The superintendent and other school administrators broke the law. Any security guard that enforced it broke the law.”

Why this matters: Speakers tied the policy to student well‑being and to district spending decisions. Brian Cooper, a resident, urged the board to stop allocating district money to legal fights and to invest instead in supports for students. “Every dollar we spend on these litigations is money taken away from the classrooms, from the teachers, and from creating an environment where each student feels safe, valued, and supported,” Cooper said.

Several speakers described mental-health risks for LGBTQ students. “Queer children are statistically much more likely to suffer from anxiety, depression, self injury, suicidal ideation, suicide attempts, and successfully taking their of their own lives,” Isaacs told the board. She said excluding students and enforcing separation “places vulnerable kids at risk.”

Not all comments were identical in focus. Dr. Joe Prisenzano, who identified himself as a parent, coach and co‑principal of Jericho High School, said the board had implemented the change after the school year began and asked for the factual basis for the board’s decision, requesting information on precipitating events, any research the board had done on impacts and whether students or student groups had been consulted. “This is a decision and a resolution that you made, you passed. So you certainly should have some feelings and some data behind why you did so,” Prisenzano said, and asked the board to respond in writing after the meeting.

Carol Elsinbitro, who identified herself as an educator and resident of 28 years, said the board had not done adequate research and urged members to consult experts and reconsider. “I encourage you to do thorough research, to speak to experts in the field,” she said.

Speakers referenced prior board actions. Prisenzano said the board passed the contested resolution on Sept. 9 and held a special meeting on Sept. 18 to compel the superintendent to comply. The board did not provide answers during public comment and told speakers that any response would be provided later.

Discussion vs. decision: The public comments recorded objections, concerns and requests for information; the transcript shows no new board vote or reversal of the Sept. 9 resolution during this meeting. Public commenters asked for follow-up and factual responses; they did not receive immediate answers minutes after speaking.

What’s next: Speakers asked for written responses and for the board to publicly explain the basis for its Sept. 9 resolution and for any legal expenditures related to defending it. The board’s prior resolution and subsequent special meeting on Sept. 18 were cited by commenters but were not rescinded or amended during the public-comment period.

Ending: The board closed public comment after multiple speakers and then moved to adjourn; no new board action on the contested locker-room resolution is recorded in the meeting transcript.