DC Everest board reopens discussion of Title IX policy after public comments; legal counsel briefs board

The DC Everest Area School District board revisited its recently adopted Title IX policies (board policy 2264 and related policy 2266) on the evening the board heard eight public comments urging the district to repeal or delay the adoption.

The discussion, prompted by speakers at the public-comment period, included a legal overview from attorney Shana Lewis and questions from board members about the new Department of Education regulations, applicable court rulings and how the district should respond.

The briefing matters because the regulations and court rulings determine how schools must process complaints of sex-based discrimination, harassment and assault and how courts might judge a district's procedures if a lawsuit follows. Lewis told the board federal regulations and several court decisions affect local obligations and that the district faces different risks depending on whether it keeps, amends or rescinds its policies.

Shana Lewis, the district's outside legal counsel, opened with a short history of Title IX and the role of administrative regulations. "Title IX's text is simple," Lewis said. "No person in The United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefit of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance." She reviewed the 2020 and 2024 Department of Education regulations and said most of the new text (she estimated about 95 percent) concerns procedural changes to how complaints are investigated and handled.

Lewis also summarized controlling court law in the Seventh Circuit (which includes Wisconsin). She described the Whitaker decision and related cases that have led courts in this circuit to treat sex discrimination claims to include claims by transgender and gender-nonconforming students. "In Wisconsin, since 02/2017, we have been under a rule by the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals that requires us to define sex for purposes of Title IX to include transgender and gender nonconforming students," she said.

Board members and speakers repeatedly asked whether the recent federal injunctions in other states (the Kansas-area injunction prompted by lawsuits brought by Moms for Liberty and Young America's Foundation) protect the district from enforcement or litigation. Lewis said the nationwide injunctions bar enforcement by the Department of Education against certain listed schools and states but do not stop private plaintiffs from relying on the 2024 regulations in a lawsuit against a district. "That injunction only applies to the Department of Education," Lewis said. "It does not enjoin the district, and it does not enjoin a plaintiff from bringing suit relying on those regulations."

Public commenters told the board the new rules would harm girls' privacy, require schools to sanction staff for misusing pronouns and allow biological males to access girls' spaces. Dan McDonald, Weston Campus pastor at Highland Community Church, said the board should reverse the August decision to accept the new rules because "the matter of gender identity is not established as a science issue, but rather it's a worldview issue." Cindy Russell, who identified herself as a district resident, said adoption of policy 2264 would "eviscerate the long-standing protection" she said was originally intended by Title IX.

Superintendent Dr. Nye framed the session as an opportunity to gather information. He told the board he'd spoken with community members on both sides and that "the clearest center of that is a shared interest in making sure that our schools are safe for all kids, and keeping parents at the center of those more difficult and personal conversations." Dr. Nye introduced Lewis and invited board questions.

Board members asked for specifics about athletics, parental notification and how staff should respond to mistaken pronoun use. Lewis said the Department of Education did not issue stand-alone athletics regulations in the 2024 rule and that the district should continue to follow WIAA (the Wisconsin Interscholastic Athletic Association) rules and any contractual obligations with that body until a court or regulator says otherwise. On pronoun use and classroom discipline, Lewis said "common sense doesn't go out the window" and that schools typically respond to honest mistakes with education rather than discipline.

Board members also asked whether not adopting the new policy would expose the district to losing federal funds. Lewis said her review of enforcement history made a sudden funding loss unlikely but warned that litigation risk, insurance coverage responses and settlement exposure were real concerns. She explained insurers review district policies when claims are filed and could decline or limit coverage in some circumstances, and that settlements could occur without the district's consent.

After extended discussion and questions, the board did not vote to rescind or change policy 2264 on the floor. The item was treated as information and the board asked staff and counsel to return with follow-up materials. "Hearing nothing, we will move on," the board president said at the close of the item, indicating no immediate action.

The board asked legal counsel and staff to return with additional information, and members signaled they will continue to monitor court rulings and guidance from the Department of Education before taking any further formal steps.

Lewis emphasized the district's options are legal judgments that balance student safety, staff guidance and risk management. "You pay me to worry about the things that could happen negatively and help you make a decision that puts you in the best position possible," she said.

The board's discussion continues to be on the docket; no formal vote to repeal or delay adoption of policy 2264 occurred at the meeting.

Looking ahead, board members said they want more detail on how the district would implement or modify procedures if it keeps policy 2264 and on possible accommodations (gender-neutral restrooms, private changing spaces) and parent-notification practices.

The board left the meeting with direction to gather additional legal, insurance and implementation information and to return the item for further consideration.