Residents urge Newport News School Board to protect LGBTQIA+ students and revisit procedure JBP

At the April 24 Newport News School Board meeting, several community members urged the board to strengthen protections for LGBTQIA+ students and to reconsider recent language in procedure JBP that they said limits the ability of staff to use students' preferred names and pronouns.

"We're asking for your assurance that you're doing everything in your power to protect the queer community and especially those who are trans in your district," said Reverend Natalie Chamberlain, who identified herself as part of a citizens' coalition and a member of the district's strategic planning steering committee. Chamberlain said district documents that "single out one group to be othered" do not reflect the division's stated values.

Jackie Batterson told the board she believes a procedural change removes rights for transgender students and suggested the change was made under pressure from state or federal actors. "I have been asking you to give our transgender children the same respect and ensure their dignity as every other student in the school system," Batterson said. She asked the board to resist "intimidation from Richmond" and to take a stand.

Mary Voss, secretary of the Newport News Education Association, urged the board to pursue nondiscriminatory policies and called for support for vulnerable students, including trans and immigrant youth. Voss also raised labor-related issues in the same comment, saying the NNEA has authorization-card majorities in multiple employee groups and urged the board to pursue stronger contracts and state-recommended bonuses for staff.

Board members did not take an immediate vote on procedure JBP during the meeting. Several public commenters urged the board to remove or amend specific sections of procedure JBP; one speaker asked the board to "remove section H from procedure JBP and remove harmful lies from its section G." The board heard the comments during the public comment portion of the agenda but did not announce a timeline for next steps.

The public comment period and union remarks placed pressure on board members to balance policy, legal obligations and community expectations. Chairwoman Searls Law acknowledged the comments and later moved the meeting along to the consent and action items. The board did not adopt or amend procedure JBP during the April 24 meeting; any formal consideration would require future agenda placement or action.