Below is a letter we sent to the BOE and Superintendent Dyson. In the letter, we expressed our displeasure with the dismissive nature of the board’s comments to the growing number of parents and community members who want to see this policy updated. We asked once again that the individual board members be open and transparent on the reasons they support four things: continuing the exclusion of a requirement for parental notification; allowing interscholastic sports team participation by chosen gender, not biological gender; requiring FCPS to provide factual, current, and balanced information to parents on gender dysphoria (as we have tried to do); and a common sense approach to bathroom and locker room use that takes into account all FCPS students.

To the FCPS BOE and Superintendent Dyson:

I write to you again as someone that represents parents via an organization that continues to be wrongly labeled transphobic, hateful, and “obsessed” with eliminating transgender and gender non-conforming (GNC) students from the state’s school systems. Unfortunately this is the labeling tactic employed by too many people that merely disagree with our proposal, and it is especially bad for the county since our proposed policy updates do not include discontinuing the recognition and support for transgender and GNC students. What seems to be driving the attacks is that it also includes requiring family inclusion when students make impactful choices regarding gender, restricting interscholastic sports participation to biological sex, requiring FCPS to provide balanced, factual information to parents on gender dysphoria, and a common sense approach to bathroom and locker room use that takes into account the impact on all students.

Now that the BOE has indicated that are of the opinion that none of the existing policy needs to be updated we have been attempting to get the rationale for that decision for parents. The BOE started with a defense of the parental preclusion policy based on a child’s safety but the data does not support that argument. When we sent the actual data on homelessness, suicide, and parental abuse the BOE ignored it and retained their position against notifying parents. When we asked the BOE to provide their individual justification for retaining the policy for allowing interscholastic sports participation by chosen gender we were told the court cases were ruling in favor of these policies, indicating that the BOE position is their hands are tied by law. We think that’s untrue (there are a number of cases whose decisions favor both sides), but putting aside whether it’s true or not, what parents are asking us is where FCPS board members stand on the topic.  They don’t feel it’s necessary to wait for a Title IX change to know if their board members believe allowing biological males to compete on a girls team is acceptable or not (and if so, why), and we agree. We tell them we cannot get the BOE to answer.

We were never given the opportunity to present any of our research or engage in a discussion or obtain a rational justification for board member decisions, so we went back to the community. We held two forums, conducted six radio spots on four stations, successfully engaged the print media (three outlets; one local, two national), met with other organizations and community groups in the county, and used our parent/community data base to ensure parents had transparency into where FCPS stood and how it got there.  The result is that many parents agree with the policy changes mentioned in the opening paragraph of this letter are now engaging in greater numbers. We asked them to let the board know how they feel.  We asked them to speak up at BOE meetings or at least come to the meetings and support those that did speak. On April 19 they did, but then board VP Rose dismissed them, saying they should worry about more important things. I’m not sure Mr. Rose realizes how insulting that comment was to those that came to be heard but its dismissive nature angered the people in the room, many who came to a BOE meeting for the first time, and it motivated many more to want to be heard.

The result was an overwhelming request from parents, community members, and many students of those families to help them get their message to the board and let them know how they feel on the topic. They wanted to know how they could enact change. Many had remembered board President Johnson saying, during that April 5 meeting, how the board was moved by a letter writing campaign by 443 supporters and they wanted to do the same. In response we organized that letter campaign, and to allow for the diverse nature of the requestors we provided a number of different letter options, enabling anyone who wished to send a letter to find their voice.  In response to Mr. Rose’s comments they also wanted to conduct a rally outside the board meeting to make sure the BOE couldn’t publicly dismiss them again.  I find it deeply disappointing that FCPS decided to characterize these events as a “political campaign” with plans for “protesting at BOE meetings,“ and that we would be “inundating schools with requests for alternative facilities.”   I don’t recall any such characterizations when, before the March BOE meeting, supporters of retaining 443 in its entirety organized protests in advance and held up signs, vocally protested, and wrote slogans (some offensive) on the sidewalks around the building.  

Let me be clear since I believe the board seems to once again be dismissing the community: Transparency in Education is not “inundating” the schools with letters or “protesting:” parents are. Community members are. When you communicate in the way you did you imply that the pushback is from a politically motivated, single organization. I assure you it is not.  We are just the conduit and mechanism to help parents. You should also be aware that the manner in which the board has conducted its meetings, the delays in getting information on things like the curriculum content, and the attacks on our organization by those that oppose changes to 443 have also made individual many parents extremely wary of speaking up. That is something FCPS should have ensured never happened but that is where we are – the actions continue to speak louder than the words.

Our initial goal at Transparency in Education was to build a better relationship between the board and the community. Towards that end we met with school officials and have focused on improvements in the BOE processes, academics, CRT principles and its language, root cause analysis, candidate positions, and other topics in an effort to create awareness and produce better results. That has become increasingly more difficult as the public comment portion of the BOE meetings has been made difficult for the community, the board’s actions increasingly send a message that they aren’t listening, only want to hear from people they agree with, and transparency continues to be harder to obtain.   

I will not be able to attend the May 17 meeting as I will be in Harford County with Dr. Kate Goonan holding another “Understanding Gender Dysphoria and School Policy” forum but hope that the board and Dr. Dyson will listen to the input of parents and the community and understand that they want to be heard, and want to hear why the board supports the four specific provisions mentioned in the opening paragraph.