The Watertown City School District Board of Education voted to uphold the superintendent's decision to retain the article "I Am Leo" in the eighth-grade health curriculum after reviewing the review committee record and the superintendent's written decision.

The vote followed more than an hour of public comment for and against the assignment, and extended board discussion focused as much on whether the district followed its own review procedure as on the content of the article. Board member Millie Smith cast the lone dissent, saying the district did not follow policy in handling the complaint.

Why it matters: the item put classroom representation of transgender students, the district's curriculum-review process and the board's role as an appellate reviewer squarely before the public. Supporters argued the material supports inclusion and mental-health prevention; opponents and a dissenting board member raised procedural concerns and objections to specific language in the assignment and its accompanying quiz.

Public comments: Several parents and community members urged the board to keep the lesson. Ebony Holmes, a parent, told the board the district must "place dignity, inclusion, and respect at the center" of educational decisions and asked trustees to "show these students by their vote that they matter." Ryan Pitomi, a community member and district rebranding volunteer, said removing the assignment would be "an act of erasure." Janelle Michael Hooper, a licensed clinical social worker, said, "Lessons like I Am Leo are nothing short of suicide prevention." Opponents, including Annie Horton, argued the material should be left to parents and said surrounding districts are not using the assignment.

Board review and debate: The record shows a community member filed a challenge to the assignment; the district convened a review committee under Board policy 8.302 and Regulation 8.302.1, which recommended retaining the materials. The superintendent reviewed that report and issued a written decision to retain the material. The community member appealed the superintendent's decision to the board, which sits as an appellate body limited to the record before it.

During discussion, a board member who voted No said the committee did not offer the complainant an informal conference and did not address the specific objections in the complaint (including concerns about "indoctrination," certain quiz items tied to the reading, and the opportunity to make an oral presentation to the committee). The speaker said the original complaint was filed Oct. 17 and that the appeal reached the board on April 1, citing the time elapsed as part of the procedural concerns.

Vote and formal action: Pursuant to board policy and the record before it, the board adopted a resolution to uphold the superintendent's decision to retain the challenged materials in the eighth-grade health curriculum. In roll call, the majority voted to uphold; Board member Millie Smith voted No.

What the board did not do: The board acted as an appellate reviewer and did not remand the decision back to the review committee or instruct removal of the material. No new curricular removal or restrictions were adopted at the meeting.

Looking ahead: Board members said they will review language in policy 8.302 and Regulation 8.302.1 to clarify the role of optional informal meetings so future complainants have clearer expectations about the process.