Students, parents and residents press Massapequa board over locker-room policy and legal risk
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
Public comment at the Nov. board meeting centered on the district's locker-room policy and treatment of transgender students; speakers included students and parents who described hostile school experiences and a resident who argued the board's policy violates state law and warned of legal costs.
An extended public-comment period at the Massapequa Union Free School District Board of Education meeting focused on the district's locker-room policy and the treatment of transgender students.
Ninth-grader Lucy Bernstein told the board she attended the Oct. 21 meeting and criticized adult behavior toward student speakers; she said, "I believe that biological males should not be sharing locker rooms and bathrooms with biological females and vice versa," while noting the district provides gender-neutral locker rooms and bathrooms as accommodations.
Resident David Ebert challenged the legality of the board's policy, citing Title IX, the U.S. Supreme Court's Bostock v. Clayton County decision and New York statutes including the Gender Expression Nondiscrimination Act (GENDA) and the Dignity for All Students Act (DASA). "The board's policy is breaking it," he said, adding that the policy was stayed by the state and that repeated litigation has cost the district significant legal fees.
Several speakers urged inclusion and described personal impacts. Mary, who identified herself as the mother of a transgender daughter, said the board "does not represent the whole community" and called for teaching tolerance and inclusion. Gabrielle, a 2022 graduate and former GSA publicity coordinator, described repeated slurs and suicidality among peers and said the law "goes against the New York State Constitution" protections for gender identity/expression. Erin Curley, a 2015 graduate with a public-health background, urged better health education about the spectrum of biological sex and gender identity and criticized board actions as "not kind."
Speakers diverged in their views: some students and parents urged policies that protect privacy and separate changing spaces by sex; others urged respect and inclusion for transgender students. The board did not take action on policy changes during public comment; several residents questioned the legal strategy and the district's litigation record.
The board moved to executive session immediately after public comment for personnel matters and adjourned with no additional public votes on the locker-room policy recorded in the public transcript.