(doesn’t just stay on World Kindness Day)

Hello readers!  

I have started this blog to serve as a place to provide easy access to information regarding our BOE.  I will go back and create a timeline of how we got to where we are today, so please check back in in the future!

Today I will focus on November’s board of education meeting which was held on 11/16/23 (World Kindness Day). The most significant update was the first reading for a repeal of policy 5756. 

Let’s stop and explain what policy 5756 is. 

The purpose of the policy is to provide guidance for the school district as to how they follow state laws regarding transgender students.  This policy was adopted in 2015.   It was then updated in 2019 after the state issued “Transgender Student Guidance for School Districts” (linked below). It passed unanimously in 2019. 

Here is a summary of the guidance. Law 18A:36-41 required the Commissioner of Education to draft and produce this guidance.

18A:36-41 Development, distribution of guidelines concerning transgender students.   

1. a. The Commissioner of Education shall develop and distribute to school districts guidelines concerning transgender students. The purposes of the guidelines shall be to provide direction for schools in addressing common issues concerning the needs of transgender students, and to assist schools in establishing policies and procedures that ensure a supportive and nondiscriminatory environment for transgender students.

b. The guidelines developed by the commissioner shall include, but not be limited to, information and guidance regarding the following:

(1) definitions of terms relevant to an understanding of transgender issues, including gender identity, gender expression, and transgender person;

(2) maintaining a safe and supportive learning environment that is free from discrimination and harassment for transgender students, including students going through a gender transition;

(3) confidentiality and privacy concerns, including ensuring that school personnel do not disclose information that may reveal a student’s transgender status except as allowed by law, and advising schools to work with the student to create an appropriate confidentiality plan regarding the student’s transgender or transitioning status;

(4) procedures for school records, including maintaining a separate official record for each student that contains the student’s legal name and biological gender and changing a student’s official record upon receipt of documentation of a legal change in name or gender;

(5) ensuring that a transgender student is addressed at school by the name and pronoun preferred by the student that corresponds to the student’s gender identity, regardless of whether a legal name change or change in official school records has occurred;

(6) issuing school documentation such as student identification cards in the name preferred by the student that corresponds to the student’s gender identity, and permitting a transgender student to dress in accordance with the student’s gender identity;

(7) providing a transgender student with the same opportunities to participate in physical education as other students, and permitting the student to participate in physical education in accordance with the student’s gender identity;

(8) permitting a transgender student to participate in gender-segregated school activities in accordance with the student’s gender identity;

(9) use of restrooms and locker rooms, including not requiring a transgender student to use a restroom or locker room that conflicts with the student’s gender identity, and providing reasonable alternative arrangements if needed to ensure a student’s safety and comfort;

(10) ensuring that school counselors are knowledgeable regarding issues and concerns relevant to transgender students; and

(11) permitting and supporting the formation of student clubs or programs regarding issues related to lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and questioning (LGBTQ) youth.

c. The guidelines shall include information on organizations or other resources available to students and parents that provide support to transgender individuals.

d. The commissioner shall periodically review the guidelines developed pursuant to this section, and shall update or modify the guidelines, as appropriate, in accordance with current State or federal laws and regulations concerning the rights of transgender students.

L.2017, c.137, s.1.

There has been confusion regarding if the policy itself is mandatory.  A local school district (Hanover) tried to pass a policy that contradicted 5756 and required mandatory parental notification if a staff thought a child MAY be LGBTQ. This resulted in their district being sued by the state attorney general (AG). During those proceedings the AG stated that 5756 is not mandatory.   While it may not be mandatory, that does not change the laws it is based upon. For example, it is state law that transgender students are able to use the bathroom/locker room corresponding to their identified gender. Repealing 5756 does not change that. All that would be accomplished by repealing the policy, is that the BOE would be taking away guidelines for staff to follow to avoid breaking any laws.   I would hope everyone can agree, we do not want to make our teachers jobs any harder than they already are!  We also don’t want to open up our district to any litigation. Hanover has spent over $100k on legal expenses.   Their BOE has claimed that these expenses are covered by insurance, which may or may not be true (there is a deductible, and a max limit which they have already surpassed. Their insurance only applies when the BOE is following state law and guidelines, and since the policy they tried to pass violated state law and the BOE’s existing policy, it remains to be seen if insurance will actually pay out for these costs)

We have seen in our community, people not only saying hateful things against members of the LGBTQ community, but also claiming that LGBTQ are mentally ill. The hateful rhetoric we have seen online, and in board meetings, is exactly why these laws and policies MUST exist. 

At the October meeting, school board member Ann Colucci called for this policy to be repealed.   It’s important to mention that she did this at the very end of the meeting after public comment had ended, and it was not on the agenda.   Interestingly enough, our local Moms for Liberty members appeared to have brought Greg Quinlan (an “ex gay” reverend who travels around the country fundraising for his organization while spreading hateful opinions on LGBTQ – he calls them LGBTQ XYZ +++) to speak about the topic. It is interesting that Mr. Quinlan spoke on a topic that was not even on the agenda. Could the guest of our local Moms for Liberty have known that Ms. Colucci would be calling for repeal ahead of time?  It’s almost as if we have board members who may be working directly with Moms for Liberty? 

After Ms. Colucci called for the repeal,  Board President Leo Coakley explained to Ms. Colucci that for a policy to be repealed there needed to be a first and second reading, to ensure board members were given notice and able to review all information prior to voting, as well as to ensure that the public was given notice and able to attend and speak at the board meeting if they desired. 

Calling for a vote for a matter not on the agenda, after public comment, is the very definition of a lack of transparency from our board.  This was explained to Ms. Colucci who proceeded to admit she was unaware of how to repeal or revise policy (after being a board member for 6 years).  You can see that portion of the October meeting here. 

The matter was then put on the calendar for first reading for the November meeting.

The policy had also been brought up one month prior to Ms. Colucci’s request for repeal, in the September meeting, again at the VERY end of the meeting by board member Christopher Milde, stating he believed the policy should be reviewed. 

Between the September and October meeting, the policy was then sent to committee to be reviewed. Several board members discussed that no committee members brought up any request to repeal the policy, and that should Ms. Colucci have issues with this policy, she should reach out to the policy committee to request to voice her concerns, which she had not. 

This brings us back to the November meeting.  The repeal of the policy was up for first reading. We had yet to hear from Ms. Colucci as to why she wants it repealed other than her stating that she learned it was not mandatory. 

BOE member Heather Champagne summarized what was discussed in the policy committee’s meeting.  Ms. Champagne said that they went over the laws that the policy is based on. Board attorney provided feedback regarding legal challenges.  The overall suggestion was that nothing changes with repealing the policy. The basis for the policy (the laws) are mandatory, and the policy exists to provide guidance to school staff to avoid potential lawsuits. 

Ms. Champagne reported that in the policy meeting she did inquire if the purpose of repealing the policy was to then create a mandatory notification policy, which Ms. Colucci refused to (and was admonished by the M4L crowd not to)answer. 

The board attorney stated that she attended a training with a panel of attorneys involved in litigation regarding this topic, and that it seemed that the court could enjoin the board in litigation for any modification or amendment, or new policy. 

She did state that the policy itself was not mandatory, and that she felt the options were to keep the policy as it is until other districts’ litigation is complete, or repeal the policy. 

BOE member Scheneck stated that while the policy is not mandatory, following the law is mandatory. The policy sets a guideline for staff to know what they are permitted to do and not do. She reported that there could be legal action if a staff missteps and does something the law does not permit. She stated that the district could be sued as well as the board due to not having proper guidelines. She stated that it is irresponsible to remove policy that provides guidelines to employees as to what the law is, so they don’t violate it. Ms. Scheneck stated that none of the people who want to repeal have clarified if they plan to create a new policy, since anyone who does so could be enjoined in the lawsuit by the AG. 

BOE member Kathy Purcell then stated that she felt 5756 could be repealed since teachers could always familiarize themselves with state law (upwards of 40 pages of laws). Members of the audience were heard yelling that they do expect employees to read the law. 

I am unsure why a few page policy summarizing those laws should be repealed when the alternative is teachers taking it upon themselves to learn the same law. In the same meeting, Ms. Purcell also admitted she had not “clicked the link” to read the policies up for first reading for the meeting. She asked assistant superintendent Seipp for a “quick dissertation” on the topic before voting.

Ms. Champagne stated that while it seems to some that policies and law should be read by everyone, people on the board don’t always do so. The audience then loudly reacted, and some one started saying “na na na nana” over Ms. Champagne’s words. 

For those who may be unaware, Ms. Colucci and Ms. Champagne both just ran for reelection against each other on opposing slates. Ms. Colucci’s “Back to Basics” slate won.  Considering these audience members appeared to be supporters of Ms. Colucci and her “Back to Basics” slate, I am unsure as to why they felt the need to act like children while Ms. Champagne spoke. 

Ms. Purcell mentioned that there are parts of the law she “completely disagrees with” and that parents shouldn’t have to put up with.  She was asked which parts she has a problem with and could not or would  not answer. 

Ms. Colucci spoke and stated that while she had voted yes on the policy previously, she is not saying she wants to get rid of it. “ Ok, so why can’t we as board members vote yes or no, what is the problem?”  Board President Coackley reminded her that was what they were doing. 

Ms. Champagne asked for clarification as to what would be the purpose of repealing policy when state law still stands, and asked if Ms. Colucci is implying that they should not be following the law. Ms. Colucci stated that she refused to answer. (I would hope all board members can agree the board should not violate state law, especially since it is part of the oath they took when they became board members.)

President Coakley then commented and stated that his concern is that if the policy is abolished, these situations are something that a teacher may only deal with once or twice in their entire career. 

He stated you “can’t crack an egg with a sledgehammer” and that the solution is not one size fits all. The board needs to allow administrators to deal with that child and that parent. He mentioned that as far as he knows , he has not heard one complaint that a parent was not aware of their child being transgender. He mentioned being personally aware of situations in which families have rejected children due to them being gay or trans. 

President Coakley stated that was why schools have professionals, counselors, as well as the superintendent, who are selected because we trust them. Policy helps staff when that particular case comes up. He stated that he does not want to be responsible for kids to be rejected, or kicked out of the house. He stated that he feels more thought needs to be given before abolishing, and that there is a difference between the intent and the impact this may have. 

President Coakley suggested all members be prepared to speak at the next meeting as to the specific parts of the policy they have issue with. 

Mr. Bocchino stated that he was willing to vote yes to repeal to further the discussion at the second reading next month.  He stated that there is such animosity between board members, and that is why he did not run for reelection. He mentioned that the board needs to be able to have civil conversations and agree to disagree.  He stated that they need to put political ideology aside. Audience members audibly laughed, and Mr. Bocchino asked what was funny. The person said something about Mr. Bocchino’s social media. He stated that he was having a change of heart, audience members continued to talk over him, and he said that no matter what he said he would be vilified. Audience said he already made up his mind. It seems that the audience was not listening to him speak when he said he was voting yes. 

Ms. Purcell stated that many children are beaten by their families and kicked out of their homes, and it has nothing to do with being gay or getting a bad grade. (except we know LGBTQ kids are at higher risk of abuse/neglect by their parents) 

She stated that there are many parents who are just inappropriately teaching their kids the wrong thing.  Ms. Purcell stated that they either have to get rid of the policy, or agree to it, and she was not up to agreeing to it. 

Ms. MacGregor spoke about seeing YouTube videos where teachers brag about not sharing information with parents….(I find it hard to take a board member seriously who gets information from YouTube)  

She then talked about special needs children and that some have different methods of communication.  Ms. MacGregor mentioned this at the last meeting, and this author found her difficult to follow. She seemed to be discussing her stepson, but it was unclear if she was speaking literally or figuratively, and he was possibly struggling in school, and the school was not informing her about it.  I am unsure if she meant that he struggled due to sexual orientation or gender identity, or just in general.  If a student was struggling, a parent would be contacted. A parent would NOT be contacted if a child expressed being gay or trans and specifically reported feeling unsafe if outed to their parents. Again, school staff are not trying to keep secrets. That is a false and inaccurate narrative. 

Mr. Milde stated that he thinks some things have no place in schools, mentioned that religion was taken out of school, and that some people will never agree. Ms. Champagne agreed with Mr. Milde, stating that there are a number of things the school board deals with that shouldn’t necessarily be on their agenda. She stated that many of these things are based on laws, which the board can’t change. She mentioned that they are bound and by the code of ethics that they uphold the law. Mr. Milde stated that some laws don’t make sense. (Is this another board member who doesn’t think it’s necessary to follow state law?)

President Coakley asked that people be prepared to have discussions about the substance of the policy at the next meeting, and specifically what language they object to that warrants it being repealed. He asked that board members keep it to the facts. 

It was then put up for a vote to pass to a second reading. 

The repeal of 5756 will now go to second reading on December 11th (the meeting is open to the public and begins at 7:30pm at Lincoln Roosevelt Auditorium -34 N. Hillside Ave., Succasunna, NJ).

It remains to be seen if anyone that voted to repeal will provide any clarification about what they think will change if repealed, or if they think it is important for the board and the school to follow state laws……

Other takeaways from last night –

Milde, MacGregor, Colucci and Purcell all voted against a social studies teacher taking the following training.

“Gender, Sexuality, & Colonialism”

This has become a pattern this past year, that M4L adjacent board members vote against any professional development/training mentioning “Social Emotional Learning”, “equity” or in this case the word “gender”?

Here is a description of the training. 

““Gender, Sexuality, and Colonialisms” November 17, 2023 Chie Ikeya, Associate Professor of History, Rutgers University Gender and sexuality were imperative for colonial governance. European, American, and Japanese colonial regimes all deployed gender and sexuality in creating and sustaining the kind of political and social orders that yielded the labor and resources on which they depended. Across different colonial empires across the globe, gender and sexuality, together with religion, race, and other intersecting categories of difference, served to rationalize and legitimize oppression and exploitation. These scholarly insights will guide our exploration of both shared and divergent historical experiences of colonialism. Focusing on select case studies, we will seek to understand the various and specific ways that gender and sexuality shaped the goals, strategies, and achievements of modern colonial powers and the marks they left on their respective colonies.“

Stay tuned for more info on how BOE members vote regarding teachers’ professional development and trainings! 

Relevant Links – 

Roxbury policy-

ELANOnline District Policies (straussesmay.com)

State Guidance-

Transgender Student Guidance for School Districts (nj.gov)