Board members spent a prolonged portion of Thursday’s work session debating two proposed resolutions: one calling for the district to cease compliance with a prior Office for Civil Rights (OCR) agreement and a second asserting that the district’s policies should recognize only two biological sexes and restrict access to certain spaces accordingly.

Trustees and several attorneys who attended the meeting cautioned against immediate unilateral action. "You cannot unilaterally just decide to disengage," one board attorney said, summarizing counsel’s view that the district cannot simply revoke an OCR resolution without following the appropriate processes and obtaining written confirmation from federal authorities.

Trustees described the district as an "anomaly" that still has an OCR agreement without a sunset clause. Some board members wanted to move quickly, citing concerns from parents about girls feeling unsafe in bathrooms and locker rooms. "We did hear fathers who told us … their daughters were afraid to use their bathrooms and their locker rooms," a trustee said.

Other trustees urged patience and a legal path: "We sent a letter 40 days ago … we said that we would wait 90 days," Board President Christine Agron said. The majority position at the meeting was to continue the existing plan: staff and counsel will seek clarification from OCR and related officials and send follow‑up letters to named recipients in hopes of obtaining a written release or direction. Trustees asked counsel to target additional recipients (trustees discussed sending letters to state and federal officials by name) rather than broad "to whom it may concern" correspondence.

No vote was taken on the two proposed resolutions at the work session. Several trustees said they would consider bringing the resolutions to the May 15 agenda for a public vote if the board directs it, but most members preferred to await the written federal response and additional legal guidance first.

Board counsel and administration noted the district faces legal tradeoffs: counsel warned the board that lawsuits could be filed by either side depending on the action the board takes, and that federal case law and OCR processes are factors trustees must weigh. Trustees asked counsel to send additional letters to named federal and state officials and to report back to the board before the next meeting.

The debate highlighted the tension trustees said they face between protecting student privacy and safety and complying with existing federal agreements and case law; the board did not change district policy during the work session.