Fountain Hills board votes not to adopt proposed Title IX policy language amid legal concerns

A public commenter and candidate, Kim Duckworth, urged the board to reject proposed Title IX policy updates and read a paragraph focusing on how the wording could extend the district—s responsibilities to property and recognized student organizations. "By making the policy broader and allowing generalizations to take place, biological females can be put at risk," Duckworth said during the public comment period.

The board—s discussion followed. Doctor Rakowski moved that the board not approve policy advisories 7.88 through 7.91 and to retain the district—s current harassment and grievance policies. Rakowski cited ongoing litigation and a recent Supreme Court ruling affecting agency interpretations as reasons to delay adopting the new language. Other board members echoed concerns about wording that could be read to include buildings and property, and about the risk of funding implications if federal requirements were later interpreted differently.

Vote and outcome: On a roll-call-style voice vote, the board agreed 3-1 to not approve the policy advisories. "All in favor of not approving policy 7 88 to 7 91, say aye," the president called; three members voted to withhold approval and one opposed. The board recorded the result as 3-1 and will retain its current harassment and grievance policies while monitoring litigation and guidance.

Why it matters: The policies at issue relate to how the district structures Title IX grievance and harassment procedures and the scope of an "education program or activity." Board members expressed caution about adopting language while federal litigation and regulatory guidance remain unsettled.

Next steps: The board directed staff to keep the item on the calendar, to track state and federal developments, and to return revised language if and when clearer legal guidance emerges.