Edison school board votes in first reading to abolish Policy 5756 after hours of public comment

The Edison Township Board of Education voted in a first-reading motion on Tuesday to abolish Policy 5756, the district’s guidance on student gender identity and privacy, after more than three hours of public comment that divided parents, students, teachers and advocates.

The motion to abolish carried on a roll-call vote: Yes — Ralph Ero, Ronak Patel, Anja Patel, Miss Pang, Vichel Patel and President She; No — Mr. Lugo, Joe Romano and Miss White. Board members described the vote as the first reading; several said they expect the item to return with a replacement policy before a final decision.

The vote capped an often emotional public-comment period in which speakers for and against the policy argued over whether it protects vulnerable students or improperly excludes parents from important information. ‘‘If a student cannot trust the school faculty and administration to call them by the name they would like to use without their parents being notified, how can they be expected to trust their teachers or counselors when they are experiencing a life‑threatening emergency?’’ said Lydia, a mental‑health clinician who urged the board not to abolish the policy.

Opponents of the policy framed the issue as parental-rights and safety concerns. ‘‘Parents are the primary protective factor for children,’’ said Anthony Mara, who told the board that parents should be kept informed about matters involving their children. Several speakers warned of medical and legal risks they said could follow from school confidentiality in some cases.

Teachers, school leaders and student speakers described circumstances in which confidentiality can keep a student safe while they prepare to involve family members. ‘‘This policy allows teachers to protect that trust and allows students to have a dialogue with an adult so that they may be brave enough to have that conversation with their parents,’’ said Grayson, a student who testified in favor of retaining Policy 5756. Several speakers, including parents and clinicians, cited research about elevated mental‑health risks for transgender and nonbinary youth and urged the board to prioritize student safety.

The board also faced criticism about process and transparency. The policy committee chair and other board members said they learned the item’s placement on the agenda only after it appeared online; the committee chair described that as ‘‘insulting’’ and urged more deliberation. A member of the public and multiple speakers said they wanted the board to develop a replacement policy rather than repeal without clear staff guidance.

Superintendent Dr. Alderelli said administration would continue to follow state law and existing anti‑discrimination policies and provide staff direction if the policy is repealed. ‘‘In the absence of policy I will have to follow law, existing policies that address discrimination and provide staff explicit guidance on how to keep students safe,’’ he said.

Board members who opposed immediate repeal said they favored replacing the policy with clearer guidance. Miss White urged the board to use the summer to draft a replacement that gives ‘‘teachers and administrators clear and consistent guidance’’ so students are treated ‘‘fairly and consistently’’ across the district.

The board’s first‑reading vote to abolish Policy 5756 does not take the policy out of effect immediately; the board signaled plans to return the item for a second reading and to work with administration on replacement language. The meeting also included other routine business, including approval of personnel and finance items and announcements about upcoming hearings and teacher recognition events.

The district serves roughly 17,000 students and receives state aid; administrators told speakers required protections under state law remain in effect regardless of the board’s policy action. The board indicated it will consider changes and additional guidance before a final vote.