Teachers and parents urge Winthrop board to pause transgender‑sports policy, warn of legal and staffing risks

Public commenters told the Winthrop School Board on Monday night they want the district to pause and reconsider proposed changes to policy JB that they say would exclude transgender females from girls sports, and asked the board for more transparency about legal and budgetary exposure.

Elizabeth Peters, building representative for the Winthrop Education Association and an ELA teacher at Winthrop Middle School, told the board she and colleagues felt the board had "rushed to pass a policy that would ban transgender females from playing on girls sports teams." She said the change "is in direct violation not only of federal law under Title IX, but also violates Maine law under the Maine Human Rights Act," and warned the district could face lawsuits and lose staff who do not want to work under what some called a "hateful schoolboard policy." "Teachers protect all students, whether you approve of them or not," Peters said.

Whitney Khan, a Winthrop resident, pressed the board for a fiscal analysis under Policy BGR and highlighted insurance limits raised by the superintendent: "Dr. Foley has confirmed the legal insurance collective cap of $250,000 shared across all districts named in the MHRC lawsuit. Once that is exhausted, each district bears remaining costs from its own budget," Khan said, asking where the money would come from for defense and potential penalties.

Nicholas D. Roer read a public comment for Cat Hoy that asked the board to publish which district policies are being revised, what consultants the district has contacted, and the total costs to date. Roer’s comment noted that outside groups have contacted other districts offering to pay litigation costs, saying on the record that "the Alliance Defending Freedom ... has contacted multiple school districts in Maine offering to cover legal fees associated with lawsuits from the Maine Human Rights Commission."

Several commenters asked the board to defer action until after upcoming elections. Beth D. Roer, a parent and community member, urged the board to "bring a motion to resend this contentious transgender policy idea and ... vote to end this divisive moment," arguing the controversy was distracting the board from stewardship of district resources.

The board did not act on policy JB during public comment. Superintendent Dr. Foley and the policy committee were cited in the meeting record: the policy committee is due to meet next Tuesday at 5 p.m. at the central office to continue reviewing policies related to transgender students, and the superintendent had previously explained the legal context on the record.

What’s next: the policy committee will meet to continue review; members of the public asked the board to publish the answers to specific budget and legal‑exposure questions at a future meeting.