Board set to vote on bathroom policy
The Perkiomen Valley School Board is expected to vote at its Feb. 12 meeting on rescinding its controversial policy regarding the use of bathrooms by transgender students.
The policy was adopted in October, and restricted bathroom use to sex at birth.
But the November election saw a new majority elected to the board, one which ran, in part, against the adoption of that policy saying it is discriminatory against transgender students and opens up the district to lawsuits.
Since the election there have been two public meetings on the matter, a policy committee meeting on Jan. 23 and a full board workshop meeting on Monday, Feb. 5. Both saw a large number of parents speaking on the subject but no official action was taken.
But action is apparently set for the next meeting.
Superintendent Barbara Russell confirmed that as of Feb. 5, the intention is for a vote to rescind or not rescind “Policy 720” to be on the agenda, although that could change up to 24 hours before the meeting.
Shona Bradley called the entire matter “a phantom issue generated by bigotry.”
Revoking the policy “is setting females up for a dangerous situation,” said Stephanie Ott. Amber Dorr said the fight to revoke the policy is to protect the feelings of transgender students, but asked if the feelings and fears of cis-gender girls who are afraid of the consequences are any less important.
Kate Salazar said she is a Democrat “who crossed over” to support Policy 720. She said in her small development of 25 homes, 10 have children who
have left to go to different schools because of the threat of the policy being revoked.
Since the Jan. 23 meeting, an online petition calling on the board to leave the policy in place gathered more than 1,000 signatures in 72 hours said parent Tracy Hen. If the board removes that policy, “you are literally opening the door to allow anybody to use any bathroom they like,” she said.
But Cory Helz noted some of the signers on the petition, which included Krusty the Klown, Saddam Hussein and Big Mac, do not live in the district, calling the legitimacy of those signatures into question.
The previous policy, 103, was an anti-discrimination policy and was in place since 1994 without problems, said Helz. The change “was a political stunt meant to drum up anger prior to last year’s election and here we are, cleaning up the prior board majority’s mess.”
The man who led that majority, former school board president Jason Saylor, remains on the board and argued once again for the policy to remain in place until revisions can be made. Unlike many parents who said they support Policy 720 as a safety issue for girls, Saylor said “It’s an issue of what this school district is going to look like in the years ahead if we go forth with removing this policy.”
Saylor said “that will allow boys in girls’ rooms, boys in girls’ locker rooms and boys in girls’ sports and that’s what touches me the most. We will be allowing boys to play girls’ sports and the long-run implications of that, to me, are very bad.” He pointed to the parents who turned up in support of the policy, and the emails they’ve sent. “I have news for every single board member, new or not. This isn’t going away.”
The law on this subject, he said “is all over the place. At what point do we say we’ll be inclusive to the best of our ability that doesn’t affect the whole apple cart. We cannot continue to capitulate to please one group of students,” said Saylor.
School District Solicitor Brian Subers said currently the law that prevails in Pennsylvania was determined in 2018 in a case brought against the Boyertown Area School District seeking to overturn its policy allowing transgender students to use the bathrooms and locker rooms of the sex with which they identify. Both the U.S. Court of Appeals and the U.S. Supreme Court declined to overturn that decision by the Third Circuit.
Subers said similar decisions were made by the Fourth and Seventh district courts, but that the 11th district upheld a policy restricting bathroom use to the sex assigned at birth. He said if Policy 720 was to be left in place in Perkiomen Valley, “I think there is a substantial likelihood that the Third Circuit would find that to be in violation of the law.”
School Board President Laura White disputed Saylor’s opinion that rescinding Policy 720 would cause further disruption in the school district, saying that she was considering rescinding it and reverting to the policy that was in place before “re-setting the clock.”
She argued that the time and in-depth discussion Saylor is now seeking before the board acts were absent when Policy 720 was adopted in October, sidestepping the usual process of seeking consensus from the policy committee before a full board vote.