Parents and community members call for clearer inclusion and immigration-enforcement guidance at Peninsula School District meeting
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
Two public commenters urged the district to clarify policies on religious activity, anti-LGBTQ influence in student groups, and procedures for immigration enforcement on school property, citing staff concerns and a 2019 state mandate referenced by a speaker. No district policy decision was made at the meeting.
At the Feb. 3 Peninsula School District board meeting, two public commenters asked the district to take clearer, concrete steps to protect inclusive school environments and to provide guidance to staff and families about immigration enforcement.
Chris Doherty, a parent of two district students, framed his remarks around the meaning of inclusion and said that inclusion does not permit organizations that are “anti LGBTQ” to operate in public schools. Doherty alleged (without a district response on the record at this meeting) that a substitute had been asking staff members of color about their origins and citizenship status and said he was concerned by a kindergarten teacher who had Christian religious books in the classroom and used the district ParentSquare platform to promote church events. Doherty said he still plans to vote yes on the district levy renewal.
Jackie Pinkerton, who identified herself as a community member, praised student protesters and said she had been contacted by district staff who did not feel supported around immigration-enforcement concerns. Pinkerton asked the board to provide “clear guidance to staff and a message to our students and families about what we're doing to support our community with regards to immigration enforcement.” She said she believed a 2019 state mandate required districts to adopt policies addressing immigration enforcement on school property but that she could not find the district policy and offered printed examples from Seattle Public Schools and the South Kitsap School District for board consideration.
The meeting record shows no immediate formal response or policy action from district officials during the public-comment period; the concerns were entered into the meeting record and the speakers asked for follow-up from administrators.
What happens next
Speakers requested a written policy or clear staff guidance; the district did not announce a next-step timeline in the meeting minutes. Board members did not vote or make a directive on the record during the public-comment period.