Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Winthrop board debates transgender‑student policy, hears staff say current accommodations have worked
Summary
The board discussed existing policy JB/JBR vs. model ACAAA language, heard administrators and principals say privacy options and case‑by‑case approaches have worked locally, and weighed legal exposure if the district changes policy against state law; members asked staff to research other districts and bring sample language back.
Board members spent an extended portion of the meeting discussing policy JB and its regulation JBR, which the administration said is currently aligned with state law. Dr. Foley explained the differences between the district’s JB/JBR and the model ACAAA policy: JB requires parental involvement in planning accommodations for transgender students whereas ACAAA uses more permissive language and explicitly permits restroom access consistent with a student’s gender identity and specifies that single‑user restrooms need not be required as the only option.
Dr. Foley also described an ongoing legal landscape: the Maine Human Rights Commission has investigations involving multiple districts and, she said, the district’s insurance carrier (XL Indian Harbor) has a collective legal‑defense cap of $250,000 across districts in related litigation. She warned that if the $250,000 cap is exhausted, districts would be responsible for additional legal expenses and that insurance would not cover any financial penalties if districts were unsuccessful in court.
Board members voiced differing views. A board member said: "I do not want a biological boy in a biological girl's class bathroom or a locker room," expressing safety and fairness concerns about girls' spaces and athletics. Another member cited the Maine Integrated Youth Health Survey and said rhetoric that frames transgender students as a threat is "very concerning," noting the population is small (under 4%) and urging protections that do not exclude vulnerable students.
School principals described local practice. The high‑school principal said the high school had three transgender students over the past seven years who were allowed to use restrooms aligned with their gender identity and that privacy options (single‑stall restrooms, nurse’s bathroom, curtains and a coaches’ changing area) are available; the middle‑school principal said one student in recent years used the nurse’s bathroom for privacy and that staff work with parents and trusted adults.
Board members discussed policy options — from retaining the current JB/JBR, to adopting the model ACAAA, to removing specific J policies — and weighed legal exposure under state law, possible athletic‑eligibility consequences (MPA gender‑equity committee procedures were cited), and practical accommodations. Dr. Foley and board members agreed staff will collect example policies from other districts (six districts were referenced) and return with recommended language; Joel Stoneton will present on capital questions next week and may also assist with policy language about designating sports as coed or single‑sex.
The board did not vote on policy changes at this meeting; members requested further research and examples before any formal policy action.
