Westerly School Committee begins process of rewriting transgender student policy

"Are we going to make a policy for furries too?" asked Committee Member Lori Wycall. "When I was subbing there were [students] wearing ears and tails in the middle school..."

Garceau, Cooke, Dunn, Cillino, Chiaradio Bowdy, Ober, and Wycall

The Westerly School Committee held a special meeting on Tuesday to discuss changes to the District’s Transgender, Gender Diverse, and Transitioning Student policy. Currently, the policy is the one developed by the Rhode Island Department of Education (RIDE) by parents, social workers, psychiatrists, and other experts. Under pressure from right-wing anti-trans activists, the committee has begun the process of editing the policy, potentially putting the lives of children at risk.

Here’s the transcript, edited for clarity:

Westerly School Committee Chair Robert Cillino: Our next item on the agenda is the Transgender, Gender Non-Conforming, and Transition Students Protocol workshop. Sometime back, the school committee voted unanimously to take a stab at writing our policy as opposed to this protocol. This is going to be, obviously, our first workshop. I imagine we're going to need several. We are intended to go till six o'clock tonight, as I do have another meeting, so hopefully we're going to end at that time.

That being said, everybody has a copy of our current protocol in front of them. We've talked about it. I think what we can start with going through this protocol itself and taking notes. If there are things that you want to change, markup, red line, or anything like that, we can talk about that.

Committee Member Christine Cooke: Before we get into the details, I want to ask, because I've had a lot of time to think about this - we all have, because it's been so long since we tackled it - but can someone make the case to me [as to] why we need a codified policy on this versus some of the [policies] that we currently have in place? We know the bathroom issues have already been addressed. The sports issue takes care of itself through the [Rhode Island Interscholastic League]. The use of pronouns is something you can't mandate because it's a First Amendment issue.¹ The transition planning, to me, doesn't belong in the Westerly Public Schools - that should be something that's done outside the schools.² Social workers would have to work with families.³ You can't keep that information from parents to begin with. If a child feels unsafe at home, there is the recourse to go to DCYF (Department of Children, Youth & Families). So, if I'm going to vote for any policy, my colleagues [need] to convince me why we need a policy. I'm not convinced that we do. We don't have separate policies for every single type of student, so I'm not sure why this is different.

Committee Member Michael Ober: Thank you, Christine. I was kind of thinking the same thing, but more [along the] lines of, How is this state direction affecting the students? Are there any problems going on that we have to address, right now? I'd like to see what issues we have right now. That would make it easier for us to see what we might want to change.

Robert Cillino: Dr. Garceau, could you speak to, have you heard of, or are you aware of any issues in terms of this protocol that have been brought to you?

Superintendent Mark Garceau: So I guess then, in terms of, well, let me think, how do I want to word this? So to try to answer your question, Ms. Cooke and I don't know if I'm right or not - I'm sure Attorney [William] Nardone would be able to better answer this than me - but … I believe that the school needs to follow the protocol set forth by RIDE, unless there's a policy stating otherwise. That is my understanding of it. But if anybody knows better, please.

Committee Member Lori Wycall: I think that the protocol from RIDE is guidance and the last time we were issued guidance from the state was masking guidance and we all saw the damage that did to the kids now, looking back on it three years later.⁴ …I know I was the one that sort of initiated writing our policy instead of adopting this protocol [but] maybe … we adjust some of our existing policies and handbook to indicate the things that are most important to us - which for me is the bathroom usage [and] the overnight accommodations on field trips. If we're not following this protocol and each case is looked at on an individual, case-by-case basis, where, if a student is struggling, we have a spot for them to land and people to help them in the school [to] help direct them to where they need to go for guidance and assistance.

I agree with Christine that we're spending a lot of time on an issue that doesn't have anything to do with education and as Christine said, if we're going to make a policy for one group of students where this protocol has never even been utilized, from what Dr. Garceau just said, why don't we go with what we go by - that every student is treated fairly, every student has a safe school [and] that bullying is bullying period, regardless if you're, I don't know, gay, LGBTQ or I don't know, an anxious child or disabled or whatever the situation is. It doesn't seem to me that we should be spending this time on a policy, on a topic, that needs to be handled by experts, parents, social workers, and psychiatrists. I would prefer [to] scrap the policy and take a look at our current handbook and policies and [see] where we can beef [that] up for the safety of all students.

Mark Garceau: If I could just clarify, Ms. Wycall - This protocol has been used. What I said was there haven't been any problems with it, there haven't been any issues, [and] there haven't been any concerns raised until recently.

Committee Member Diane Chiaradio Bowdy: We adopted this [policy] - I don't know if it was [in] '16 or '17. If there are issues with it, we would have to withdraw it and replace it with something - [even if] it's content found in other policies - but this is an adopted protocol and it's leashed with law.

I have concerns about sports, but that doesn't mean I would ever vote to do anything that would go against the law. We need to look at exactly what the law says and if it is not woven into all the policies we have, then I think that's what we need to make that happen.

Committee Member Leslie Dunn: I think it needs to be said, as Dr. Garceau pointed out - it has been used and to date, there's nothing any of us are aware of that [the policy] has caused harm to a student in our district. What I think is important is [that] while we can say, “We don't have a protocol for every single different type of child,” there are groups of students who need something in writing to reference so that they can reach out to the appropriate individuals.

It's also key to point out that this creates a roadmap. It is on a case-by-case basis. There may be a family that comes forward that says there are things in here that don't work for them. There may be a family [for whom] this is exactly what they need to navigate this within our district. We just have to keep in mind that this is a good roadmap. Obviously, on a case-by-case basis, maybe we include verbiage to say that decisions are going to be made by the family in conjunction with psychologists, social workers, or whoever they do decide to pull in from the school.

I found [that] Barrington Schools has a really good protocol in place that goes through a checklist - like, Who at the school is aware? What are their outside resources? What is the student's plan? Do other students know about the student transitioning or have already transitioned? What are the educators doing? What are the differences with names? If people feel that things are being hidden from parents - that can be a part of the checklist - Where are we in having the conversation with the parent? Where are we in having the conversation with other students? If we are going to say that we don't need to touch this, but maybe need to create some different guidelines, [and] a part of that may just be [to] open up more. We don't understand what it looks like [when] they're having this conversation.

Robert Cillino: That being said, if we wanted to, we could adjourn the meeting, not touch the protocol at all, and say it will be [on] a case-by-case basis. Again, in [the] absence of a policy [from] this committee, [school] building administration up to Dr. Garceau’s level, will handle everything on a case-by-case basis based on the regulations that they have in their handbook and everything else.

Question: Do we want to continue to look through this protocol that we currently have in place or let it be handled at the building level?

Lori Wycall: I can't agree to something that's excluding the parents and if we have to look at that one particular section in here - also the bathrooms, and the parents, and the overnight accommodations. If we're going to let this sit, we need to adjust those because we can accommodate every child's bathroom needs by having single-use bathrooms in each building designated for anybody [who] wants extra privacy.

We absolutely cannot have boys and girls sleeping together on overnight field trips. I'm sorry [but] a 13-year-old freshman could be with an 18-year-old senior on a field trip. I mean, this is not safe. It's not acceptable to me as a parent.

The idea of not giving a child or the parents the resources to handle this all appropriately and hiding this from the parents is highly egregious. Who is going to protect - are we indemnified by RIDE when we are sued because of something going wrong with this?

This not - this is not a school's place to replace the parents. And outing kids? I'm sorry, but if a child is that unsafe at home, then the school has to call DCYF. They're mandated reporters. If a child is seriously gender confused and wants to be this person, how can they possibly live like this for six hours at school and flip a switch and be someone different at home? It's completely contradictory. So those three points to me are - I'm not giving up those. If we need to take a look, piece by piece, I would spend the time to do that. If we need to look at those three areas, I think we should do that.

Michael Ober: Well, as the superintendent said, there hasn't been any issue yet. There hasn't been a bathroom issue. There hasn't been a sleeping issue, yet. I understand what you're saying. I can't imagine a field trip where 13 and 18-year-olds will be put together regardless of their sex. Also, in regards to informing the parent of what the student is doing: I mean, [if] we do that we guarantee that they won't tell anybody. It's not like if we do this policy we'll inform the parents. It's that that child will keep it secret even in school. It won't be them flipping it off and on when they go home or not. It's that they'll be pretending all the time and there's no good solution to that. Your change would create another problem.

Diane Chiaradio Bowdy: The other thing to remember is - it's not just in this situation that the school can't share information with the parents - it's a whole big issue of different things that can't be shared. That's why I said I want to be careful - because this is all edict in law. We don't want to - I'm not willing to vote for anything that's going to break the law. Whatever we do up here, we have to have a majority vote. I don't know what we're going to do that.

Mark Garceau: If I could just clarify, concerning the field trips - I know it's been stated several times, but it's not accurate to say that students are being forced to room with students of the opposite gender, transgender students, or anything along those lines. What the protocol spells out is that if there's a field trip, band trip, a science Olympiad out-of-town, or whatever, and there are overnight accommodations that have to be provided, we cannot deny a transgender student the opportunity to participate in that activity.

It doesn't say we have to have them room together. The reality is that any transgender kid probably would have friends who would say, “Sure, come room with us.” If that weren't the case, what the protocol says is [that] you need to figure it out - up to and including providing that student with their room so the student can't be barred from participation in the activity.

That's the point here. Just as we can't bar other protected groups from participating in an activity, protocol says the district needs to figure it out. If that means providing that student with their room, so be it.

With the lavatories, we do have gender-neutral bathrooms in all of our buildings, but to dictate to any student what bathroom they have to use is going to be problematic. If the administration said to any male student, you're not allowed to use the boys' bathroom anymore, that's going to be problematic. There's going to be an issue there. Those things have to be worked out.

Regarding the issue of mandated reporting, Ms. Wycall is right. If the district suspects abuse at home, we are all mandated reporters and have to report that to DCYF. But if the district is going to take the position that anytime a student confides in an educator, counselor, teacher, or principal that person automatically becomes a mandated reporter about their gender identity or whether they're pregnant or not, or any of those kinds of things - that is also going to have to be worked through and thought through because teachers would become, under the policy as I hear it being suggested, mandated reporters for that kind of information as well. And that creates its challenge.

Leslie Dunn: Two things: One, I was just going to point out something again - we're our district, so we're not just going to take somebody else's protocol - but one of the questions asked in the Barrington packet is, What are the expectations regarding the use of facilities for any class trips? That can be a conversation between the student, the parent, the family, and the school. In addition to that, my question to Ms. Wycall would be, What is the concern, if you could verbalize it? If there's a transgender student within our schools that gets to room with the gender that they identify with, what is it that makes you feel uncomfortable about that?

Lori Wycall: My daughter would not be sleeping with the boy in my house. She should not be sleeping with the boy on a field trip.

Leslie Dunn: As a quick follow up to that: If somebody has transitioned and you [and] your child was not aware that they had transitioned - and this is somebody that they've befriended, that they've shared a room with ... and you saying [that] you do not want your child rooming with a student who has identified as transgender, are you comfortable [with the idea that] the responsibility falls to the parent saying to the school, “My child going on a field trip - I would like them to be in a single accommodation because I'm concerned about them rooming with somebody who is transgender?”

...

I guess it's also a question for Dr. Garceau. Could that request be made, not so much of the transgender student, but by a student who says, “I'm uncomfortable rooming if you can't guarantee to me that everybody who's in my room was born the sex of the individuals in our room.” Would you be comfortable going to the school and saying, “I want my child to have a single-use accommodation - an individual room - because I'm uncomfortable with not knowing if there's a transgender individual in the room?”

Lori Wycall: I suppose, but I still don't see why we're creating a policy. What if we - Are we going to make a policy for furries too?⁵ When I was subbing there were [students] wearing ears and tails in the middle school. So are we going to now have to do a protocol for every identity that kids are identifying with these days?

Robert Cillino: From what you said a little bit earlier, Ms. Wycall, about if we didn't have a policy. If we just went with this, there were some things in here that you weren't in agreement with, correct? This is why, I think, again, this committee voted to look at writing their policy because there were some things in the protocol that some people didn't feel comfortable with. That's why we're here - to see if we did write our policy, what were the things we'd want to include and not include from the start. It's not that we're writing a policy for one particular subgroup, we're taking a protocol that some people on the committee are not pleased with and seeing if we can replace it. When we write a policy, we have to do the work of writing it and then we have to have a first read in a public meeting before we can take any action on it, and then we would have a second read.

So whatever happens up here now, or for any of these workshops that we have, nothing is going into effect until it gets voted on in an open meeting, after there's been at least one public reading of the document. That's where we're at. That's why I said, if we want to look at the protocol that's in place and see if there are things that we want to take out and edit - and let's be honest, this issue is relatively new to us. It is very divisive and people take it right to heart because it's very real to people on both sides. There's no way that this is going to be easy work by any means. To come up with a policy that would make everybody happy would probably be impossible. That's not to say we can't try to find some kind of common ground here to make everybody feel at least comfortable with what's going on in the public schools. That being said, again, if we want to start to work through this policy and see things that we might want to either edit or agree with, kind of like we would do with a contract, that's where I can think to start. But I'm open to other ideas as well.

Christine Cooke: I see Dr. Garceau as the voice of reason in all this. This guy has been in education for how long - he lives and breathes this stuff every single day. He knows what's going on. We did not have anything so he - we've never adopted this, by the way, just to correct Ms. Bowdy, this was never adopted by the school committee. This is something the superintendent told our school committee existed and made sure we knew that that's what we were following. Nobody cared about it, no one knew. He's been dealing with it on a day-to-day basis.

Dr. Garceau, why did this come into being? Can you bring me back to 2016-17? Were there kids being discriminated against? Is that why - were there issues and if we didn't have this, do you think educators would be treating kids poorly and not being fair to transgender kids without this?

Mark Garceau: 2016 predates my time in the district, but absent a protocol, every time we had a transgender or gender non-conforming student identify themselves or show up on our doorstep, we'd be making it up as we go. It's for that reason that you have protocols drafted and in writing - so that administrators and building principals don't feel like they have to make it up every time they encounter that kind of situation and potentially open the district up to litigation and potentially fail to meet the needs of their students. That's why we have any [of the] protocols that we have - so that we handle situations as they arrive [in a way that is] codified and spelled out.

Lori Wycall: What litigation? Are you talking about litigation from RIDE?

Mark Garceau: No, I'm primarily talking about litigation that would be brought by the family of any students whose rights were denied, infringed upon, or otherwise ignored. Take, for example, our special education population. Special education is a very litigious area. There are ways that things have to be handled. There are privacy concerns, procedural concerns, and notification concerns. All of that is spelled out to the nth degree. The districts handle things by the law, with the best advice of legal counsel, educators, medical professionals, and others, so that the district doesn't mishandle those situations.

This [protocol] is very similar in that respect [in that] that teams of lawyers, physicians, [and] mental health counselors developed these guidance documents - folks who do this and know this work well. It's in the protocol so that if a student or a family presents, we know where to go, how to handle it, what protections need to be put in place, and what notifications need to be shared - all of it, because again, the alternative is making it up as you go, doing it differently every time and potentially putting the district at risk of litigation and putting our students at risk of discrimination.

Lori Wycall: What about litigation from families that wanted to be included and are locked out of it because the school decided to not tell the parents? I mean, they could also sue us.

Mark Garceau: Potentially, but that's never happened. It's never been raised as a concern.

Lori Wycall: Has it ever happened? That we've been sued the other way? Neither has happened…

Mark Garceau: No, because followed this protocol. We followed this protocol.

Leslie Dunn: I hear the concern around, not hiding things from parents, but there is a section that says it's about helping the student get to that place. The goal is for this to be a joint effort between the student, the family, and the school. There is language in here that says it's helping [the student] get to the place of being able to have the conversation [with parents]. So I think that having that verbiage in there is helpful - to say that the goal is to do this all together effectively and not to keep families out of the loop. I think too, we have to also take into account that there are, as Mr Cillino said, it's something that people are navigating, and not everybody gets it right.

The plan also looks different for every family. Some kids are going to be able to go home and say, “Mom, I want to have this conversation with you. Here's what's happening” and the [family is] going to get on the phone with the school and it's going to be great. Then there is the very rare reality of having to involve DCYF or just knowing that this student is going to be terrified to go home and make sure that they have the right support.

So I hear what you're saying - you don't want to exclude families and the concern around a family possibly coming after us in a legal sense, but having that language say [that] the goal is [to] make sure we're doing this together. It is in there.

Lori Wycall: That is exactly - I mean - I can't agree with that. I guess my point is that the way it reads, it leans toward the ability to hide it. There's a section for elementary school students that's very clear about working with the family and working with the parents. It's on page three, it's section 3-A, and it clearly states [it.] Then it goes into secondary school students and that's where it changes and it says, “Generally notification to a student's parents or guardians,” blah, blah, or about their gender, is unnecessary. Then, at the bottom of that second paragraph, under secondary school students, says that [if] “the administration determines that notifying the family carries a risk for the student...” then it goes on from there.

Why wouldn't we have the same process for every student in the school system? That is a minor. I mean, why is a 14-year-old different than a 7-year-old?⁶ In my opinion, they're minors, their parents are still there. They're dependent on their parents. They're dependents. They're dependent on their guardians. It is the same to me at 8, 6, 7, 8, 14, 15. When they're 18, it's different. I have to sign a slip from my daughter to get an Advil from the nurse and it just doesn't make sense at all to me. I think we can adjust the wording to make it clear.

Robert Cillino: If we could, I was thinking that maybe we could start working our way through the document, maybe as a group, that might be a little bit easier. I don't know if people have had a chance to look through this, but as you look through the first section of the definitions, does anybody have any disagreement on what any of those definitions are in terms of if they were to exist for a policy? Does that make sense? Can we all agree on at least the definitions that we have?

Then the next section is section three, which is on page three and talks about protocols for students who identify as transitioning, transgender, and gender-nonconforming. The first part of it says the school staff will accept the student's assertion of his or her gender when there is a consistent, uniform assertion of the student or any other evidence that the student's gender identity is sincerely held.

Lori Wycall: What if it's against a particular administrator or teacher's religious beliefs or even personal beliefs?

Robert Cillino: I don't know.

Lori Wycall: I mean it's a question. I don't know.

Robert Cillino: I guess I would view it - I mean personally, I would view it as it, I guess, as how big of an issue it would be for that person.

I don't know. Let's put a question mark next to that one, I guess. So the next section is the elementary school students. So if you want to just read through just section A, just elementary. I think that's what Ms. Wycall alluded to this. Any feedback on this section? So secondary students, if you want to read through that...

Christine Cooke: I would say make it simple. Just don't differentiate between the two. Make all students - if school staff believes that gender identity is presenting itself, just make it one. Don't differentiate between the age groups and then you solve the problem. The biggest sticking point we have is parental rights and trying to usurp those.

Robert Cillino: Thoughts on that? I know there are some.

Lori Wycall: I agree with that statement. And then what I had suggested was “all students” instead of separating at elementary and secondary, and then I had a separate section that was secondary school students over the age of 18 - I guess we'd have to get [Attorney William Nardone] involved with the legality of the wording, but [I] started with that same opening of “if the school staff believe that a gender identity issue is presenting itself, creating challenges,” all of that was the same. “Generally, notification to an adult is unnecessary as they are of legal age. However, the school shall still work as a bridge for communication between the adult student and their family. In these circumstances, the school administration should ask the superintendent for direction on how to proceed.” This is what I came up with, but...

Robert Cillino: Other thoughts?

Diane Chiaradio Bowdy: To Leslie's point from before, “situations addressed case-by-case require schools to balance the goal of supporting the student with the desire that parents be kept informed about their children.” So the desire is to be kept informed, but I want to look at the actual language in the law to see what we have right now... And to Ms. Wycall's point, we need [our] attorney and probably another attorney involved, like Mary Ann Carol to make sure that we are not stepping anywhere that we shouldn't be. I mean, do we want the parents to know? Of course, we do, but we have to be careful. That's why I said earlier that there are other situations where we can't share that information either. So I think we need to understand what the law is there.

Lori Wycall: Can I ask Ms. Browdy, what are you referring to as other? What other instances is the school not permitted to [inform parents]?

Diane Chiaradio Bowdy: Well, Dr. Garceau just mentioned one when he said pregnancy and things like that. I want to make sure that we know exactly what the wording is.

Leslie Dunn: Two things. If we remove the separation between elementary and secondary school, I think it's wise to make it like a tiered system of saying this is our goal. Number one is to have this conversation this way. Student, family, school. That's goal number one based on the educators, professionals in the school, and the superintendent. This is step number two: If we find that goal number one is not attainable at this time - and I don't know if we already maybe have a document like this - but we do have a document [on] this one from Barrington and there's a question that says, “Are the parents and guardians of the student aware and supportive of the child's gender status? Yes or no?” Then the next thing is, “If no, what are the considerations?” It's a roadmap.

Maybe this would help our conversation, if we do have some existing paperwork like this, just the blank template of what some of those questions are that are being asked and how we get to a place where it's saying, “Yes, we're telling the parents tomorrow, or no, we're telling the parents in six months pending this and this.” I think that would help decide how to move forward with this section of the protocol.

Robert Cillino: That could be helpful. Other thoughts on this section in terms of that? I know that parent notification is it is a big sticking point for a lot of people, and I don't know how it falls legally, honestly. To Ms. Wycall's point, if somebody's supposed to be at a dance and they don't show up, you get a phone call saying they bought a ticket for the dance and they didn't show up. Where are they? So I don't know how we determine when we have to notify [parents]. It doesn't seem clear - or maybe not in the best interest.

Anything else in this section? Number two on this one: “When the student has expressed an intent to transition, ensure the school is supportive [and] safe and the school department shall develop a gender transition plan for the student, which adheres to the following resources, make them available to parents and students who have additional questions or concerns.”

Privacy- “Ensure the privacy of students [who] are transitioning to the extent that the student desires” and reads on “transgender and gender nonconforming students have the ability of all students to discuss and express their gender identity and express openly and decide when [and] with whom and how much of their private information to shared with others.”

Lori Wycall: The only thing I think, and that's number two: "When a student has expressed an interest to transition, to ensure that the school is a supportive and safe environment, the school department shall" instead of "develop," because we do not have the experts on our staff - I think the school department can "agree to a gender transition plan which adheres to the following protocol." This means that this student is referred to experts outside the school who know how to work up a transition plan. Who do we have that knows how to work a transition plan?

Robert Cillino: Dr. Garceau, any thoughts on Ms. Wycall's point?

Mark Garceau: Again, if I were to use the special ed analogy - We develop plans for kids all the time and we have people within the district that have had training on this issue. We have people who have developed plans that have been implemented successfully in our building. If you allow outsiders to present the district with a plan, there's the potential that that plan is beyond our capability to carry out. It could also not take into consideration the local context. We know our buildings, we know our teachers, we know our kids. I wouldn't feel comfortable being bound by a plan developed by an outside agency or anyone else, whether it's for this, special education, a 504 plan, or anything, to be honest.

Lori Wycall: Why can't this then fall under the Director of [Pupil Personnel Services] if they're handling all of these cases? Why can't [it be] under special ed? Why couldn't we just have a section of something like this then?

Mark Garceau: Well, again, I used special education only as an analogy because we go through a lot of the same processes, but [transgender, gender diverse, and transitioning students] are not learning disabled. That's the simplest answer.

Robert Cillino: On privacy, the school department works closely with the student's family in devising an appropriate plan regarding confidentiality of the student's transgender or gender non-conforming status that works for both the student and the school. School personnel should not disclose information that may reveal the student's gender status unless legally required to do so and unless the student has authorized such disclosure.

Lori Wycall: On page five under B and then the first bullet. Again, just the wording. If our goal is that the families are involved, why do we have a parenthesis in there that says, “If the family is involved?” I mean, it's little things like that. If we delete those parentheses, we're assuming the family knows, and that's where our stand needs to be.

Diane Chiaradio Bowdy: And to Ms. Wycall's point, once we find out what the exact language is and what protections the students are afforded, depending on their age, then we can maybe make changes like that. But I think all of that will have to be decided after we know the plan.

Robert Cillino: Also on names and pronouns.

Lori Wycall: The next section that I had questions about was the dress code. We have a dress code section of the handbook. It probably wouldn't need to be mentioned again. The first sentence: “Schools enforce the dress code pursuant to the school department policy.” That's all we need there.

Robert Cillino: Seems straightforward to me too…

Diane Chiaradio Bowdy: If we're going to look at the [dress code], we need to bring that policy and review that.

Robert Cillino: We did just approve the handbook. It would've been in the handbook,

Diane Chiaradio Bowdy: But at all levels?

Leslie Dunn: I was going to say, similar to what Ms. Bowdy was saying, if that change were to be made, then we would want to review even though we just did it. If we are going to take out language, then we'd want to review the policy we have in place about the dress code just to make sure that we're not setting a student up for a bad situation. Especially the line that says school staff shall not enforce a dress code more strictly against transgender or gender nonconforming students than other students. We would want to make sure that we're not putting students in a place where they may be judged harshly or something based on what our dress code says, [that] doesn't support their gender identity.

Robert Cillino: Correct me if I'm wrong Dr. Garceau, but dress codes are gender-neutral. They're not different for boys or girls. They're all the same.

Mark Garceau: To a degree. We don't address crop tops for boys as a rule, but they are pretty much the same. And we try to stay away...

Robert Cillino: But the language is pretty generic, right?

Mark Garceau: It's pretty generic. But I guess the language here is that if people perceived to be a male student show up to school in traditionally female clothes, is that student going to be disciplined? Who's going to be responsible for that? That's why [that language is] in here.

Robert Cillino: I know in our dress code we have it worded as for tops, '“It covers the armpits, covers the torso.” It doesn't matter if you're a boy or a girl, you don't use crop top or that kind of term because it's more gender specific. [The dress policy] covers this for everyone. I guess we can look at that.

So you have our restroom, locker room, and changing facilities policy part of this. This should go quickly.

Lori Wycall: This was the section that I didn't completely rewrite, but the wording, [should be] something to this effect: “the restroom, locker room, changing facility - All students are entitled to have access to restrooms, locker rooms, and changing facilities that are sanitary, safe, [and] adequate, so that they can comfortably and fully engage in their school programs and activities. Any student who expresses a need or desire for increased privacy should be provided with reasonable alternative arrangements. Reasonable alternative arrangements may include the use of private areas, a separate changing schedule, or the use of a single stall restroom. Any alternative arrangement for transgender, gender-nonconforming, or transitioning student should be provided in a way that protects the student's ability to keep his or her transgender status confidential if he or she so chooses.” I kind of took some out and added some and, I don't know, that's just the gist of my thoughts...

Robert Cillino: But of course, the issue is ... the ability to use the locker room or facility of how they identify. Am I right on that?

Lori Wycall: I didn't hear what you said.

Robert Cillino: I'm looking at A and B. That's where I think the crux of the issue is on this one.

Diane Chiaradio Bowdy: On this one, again, not to sound like a broken record, but it comes down to the law. What does the law say? If a transgender student knows that a single-use or unisex bathroom is available to them, as it is to everyone, but choose to go into the restroom of the sex that they identify as, what does the law say? Do we have the right to say, “Oh no, you can't go in the girl's room because you're biologically a male?” I mean, I don't know the answer, so I need to know what the law says exactly.

Robert Cillino: I believe this document was written by Mary Ann Carroll

Diane Chiaradio Bowdy: It was. I think Dr. Garceau mentioned earlier that there are a bunch of different professionals in different disciplines. I would assume that this document is the culmination of a bunch of experts on the subject, which none of us are.

Robert Cillino: Other thoughts on this? I know it's a big area where there's a lot of disagreement. How do you make a policy that's going to make anybody happy in that case? I don't know. Maybe the answer is not to have any multi-use bathrooms. Maybe we should get rid of boys rooms and girls rooms and just have all single-use stalls and then we don't have to worry about that. I don't know, but I feel like this is going to be a lot of spinning in the mud here for a while. Okay.

Any other thoughts before we adjourn the meeting at this time? We'll have to work on this. We have other pages to go through and other thoughts. I guess we'll need to get some other people involved as well so we can hear what they have to say.

1. This is false. Teachers can be instructed to use preferred pronouns and this does not conflict with a teacher’s First Amendment rights. This is simple employment law.

2. Westerly Superintendent Mark Garceau: “We develop plans for kids all the time and we do have people within the district that have had training on this issue. We have people who have developed plans that have been implemented successfully in our building. If you allow outsiders to present the district with a plan, there's the potential that that plan is beyond our capability to carry out. It could also not take into consideration the local context. We know our buildings, we know our teachers, we know our kids. I wouldn't feel comfortable being bound by a plan developed by an outside agency or anyone else, whether it's for this, special education, a 504 plan, or anything, to be honest.”

3. They do.

4. Masking during Covid did not harm children.

5. If necessary.

6. 14-year-olds and 7-year-olds are different.