CUMBERLAND – In a move that drew praise from advocates calling for protecting transgender youth, the School Committee voted 5-2 against changing its policies to require parental notification.
Many attendees at the July 20 meeting testified for maintaining the protections.
The policy change would have required that parents be informed of their child’s identifying as transgender as long as it is determined that the child is not in danger, and that teachers use the pronouns and gender preferred by parents.
Phoenix Witt testified that this is not a nuanced issue with multiple legitimate perspectives, it is about those who oppose the murder of trans children and those who are complicit in it. Meta analysis from 2023 found that one in six trans people attempted suicide, said Witt, and 40 percent considered it.
A school that affirms a trans child’s pronouns and names reduces suicidal attempts by 29 percent, said Witt, and an affirming parent reduces suicide rates below cisgender suicide rates.
“If you pass these policies, the blood of trans children is on your hands,” said Witt.
Member Lisa Goldstein noted the robust conversation from two nights earlier at the policy subcommittee level. She thanked everyone for the respectful and thought-provoking discussion and attorney Stephen Adams for taking many questions and challenges to his legal advice. She thanked everyone who testified for speaking based on their lived experience and legal advocacy.
Goldstein explained that the policy came up for review due to the Supreme Court’s decision in Mirabelli v. Bonta, which addressed parental right to be informed of their children’s gender-related social transition and the question of whether the district’’s policy complies with the law.
“There was extensive discussion about the binding nature of the Supreme Court decision. Is the law settled? The question of the relevance of the Foote vs. Ludlow decision in the First Circuit Court of Appeals, which ruled in favor of the school committee and its policies,” she said. “And then the April 2026 U.S. Supreme Court decision not to hear the parents’ appeal. In the end, the subcommittee recognized we were at an impasse.”
Goldstein said she conducted extensive research in response to questions two days earlier, saying she was left confused and without clarity on what the federal decisions mean.
“For our policies to be in harmony with the law, there needs to be clarity, in my view,” she said. And when clarity is lacking, it is incumbent upon me to protect our most vulnerable students. Therefore, I move to reject the amendments in policy A7.”
Member Kerry Feather seconded the motion, and she other members then gave their comments. She thanked everyone for their testimony, saying she’s not convinced the district is out of compliance with its current policies. Feather also cited the testimony of those who stated that no safeguards are enough and how harmful these policies can be.
Feather said she felt they would be in the same position whichever choice they made, as they can be sued either way. The change, she said, would do a lot of harm in the by erasing a strong policy in place protecting youth “as they discover who they are.” For those students who might need protection, she said, she’s not in favor of changing the policy.
Member Keri Smith said she took this task seriously, explaining that they were going on the information they had based on the outcome of the court cases and trying to find the best solution based on the law. Adams, she said, was clear about what he saw as an attorney.
She thanked attorney Jennifer Wood for bringing forward new information that they hadn’t had, saying that Adams now agreed. Smith said she had questions she didn’t have when she felt this was a solid case and they were following the Supreme Court’s ruling, including based on information from Foote v. Ludlow School Committee and Littlejohn v. School Board of Leon County.
Smith said no member on the committee is against protections for the trans population. She said personal beliefs shouldn’t come into what they’re doing, noting the friends and acquaintances she supports who are trans. Smith said they should step back and look at this matter further over another month to see what might need to happen.
Member Jason Dean said he has two young boys and that he can’t imagine looking at them and saying he wouldn’t accept who they are. He said he’ll forever be an ally and in favor of letting people be who they are, and he’s not naive enough to believe that every parent would accept this type of news from their child.
That said, emphasized Dean, the schools are the government, and he doesn’t want the government telling people how to raise their children or keeping secrets.
“I am not willing to abandon parental rights,” he said, adding that he understands the anger and heartfelt opinions over this issue.
Chairperson Amy Vogel thanked everyone for their bravery in testifying. She said the policy shouldn’t be amended and she doesn’t think they should look at it in another month. The courts will do what they do, Vogel added, and then the committee can look at everything once it’s settled.
The committee then voted 5-2 to reject the amendment, with Dean and member Andrew Bacon the two opposing votes.
Brad Dean, Jason’s cousin and a former mayoral candidate, later posted contact information for all five members who voted against the amendment, saying those five decided they are the ultimate authority over children.
“They decided that if your child expresses a desire to become a man or a woman, you have no right to know that information,” he said. “I have to sign a permission slip allowing the school to give my child Advil if they have a headache, for crying out loud. Yet, if my son decides he wants to become a woman, I am not notified in any way. Transgender individuals are significantly more likely to attempt suicide, and these individuals believe it is in your best interest, as a parent, not to know this information.”
He then said it’s time “to take our town back,” and to remember this vote in two years when the next election comes.
The comments prompted mixed reactions, with numerous commenters thanking the five committee members for their vote to protect children.
