Residents urge Darien Board to retain gender identity protections in district policy

Dozens of parents, students and community members urged the Darien Board of Education on March 26 to keep gender identity and gender expression listed as protected classes in the district's harassment and nondiscrimination policies.

Speakers told the board they were alarmed that the district was considering removing those protections and said doing so would risk the safety and mental health of LGBTQ+ students. Several referenced town and state survey results and national data to make their case.

The comments came during the meeting's public-comment period and ranged from personal testimony about bullying to appeals to follow Connecticut law. Kate Havoc, a Darien resident who identified herself as an ally, said she was 'embarrassed' that the community was 'judging whether people belong here for who they are' and urged the board to protect all students. Dan Guller cited the 2023 Thriving Youth task-force survey, noting higher rates of bullying and suicidal ideation among local teens who identify as LGBTQ+. Rebecca Relyea described repeated harassment she faced in school and specifically asked the board to 'adopt the Connecticut Title IX protected classes' so that students 'whose gender identity and expression is different from their peers' would be covered.

Other speakers included parents and student-athlete captains who linked the school's duty to protect students with broader mental-health concerns. Christie O'Hagan said Connecticut law already requires these protections and called attempts to remove them 'wildly immoral.' Tom Holly Thomas, who identified as a trans woman and local volunteer advocate, described longstanding bullying and suicide attempts she experienced and warned that removing protections would worsen risks for young people.

Board discussion later in the meeting focused on legal complexity rather than immediate policy changes. Board counsel and outside counsel (Shipman & Goodman) were cited in a memo reviewing conflicting federal and state guidance. Members said the law is unsettled: the state has issued guidance emphasizing compliance with Connecticut law while federal Title IX guidance and recent executive actions have created uncertainty.

Board members said they want current legal advice before taking a final vote. "If you follow counsel's guidance, you rarely get yourself into trouble," one board member said, and another urged caution because court rulings and administrative guidance are still evolving. Several members noted the administrative recommendation and the need to reconcile state certification obligations with any federal preemption questions.

The board did not vote on changes to its nondiscrimination policy at the March 26 meeting. Policy committee members said they will continue reviewing counsel's research and expected further committee and board discussion in April.