What’s happening?
Since March, DSISD officials have been reviewing potential updates to local policies, including the nondiscrimination statement. District officials review these with the help of officials from the Texas Association of School Boards, who offer recommended revisions to align with current laws and standardize language across procedures.
“TASB’s role is to understand the local governance goals of the policy and then to make sure the wording reflects what the district is trying to achieve,” TASB spokesperson Slyvia Wood told Community Impact.
Under some of the proposed changes presented at an April 15 informational board meeting, parents raised concerns about the implications of the removal of language referring to the LGBTQ community.
“The recommended policy updates included certain changes for consistency have been perceived by some as an attempt to remove protections for [LGBTQ] students and staff,” board member Stefani Reinold said in a statement April 22. “The removal or modification of protections against bullying or discrimination was never the intent of these changes and would not be the result.”
The policy revisions are proposed amid the Biden administration and the Department of Education announcing changes to Title IX in April—the federal law that prohibits sex-based discrimination in any school that receives federal funding—which now includes the terminology “sexual orientation” and “gender identity.”
Wood said the Title IX changes go into effect in August and will be reflected in the legal framework TASB officials use for reference when supporting districts with local policy. Any language can be changed or removed by a school board, including language referencing gender or sexual orientation, she said.
The specifics
Current district policy reads that a decision to not renew a contract of a superintendent or employee can’t be “based unlawfully on race, color, religion, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, national origin, age, disability, or any other basis prohibited by law.”
The policy change would remove “gender identity” and “sexual orientation” but not any other identity-related term.
Language regarding student transfer requests currently reads that any decision can’t be based on “race, religion, color, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, disability, national origin, or ancestral language.” The changes would remove “gender identity” and “sexual orientation” from the policy.
Student discipline policies and the district’s statement of nondiscrimination would be revised too, removing any mention of the terms. Additionally, the definition of sex-based discrimination would be removed from the statement of nondiscrimination, if approved by the board.
Sex-based discrimination, as defined by the American Civil Liberties Union, is when someone is treated less favorably because of that person’s sex, which includes sexual orientation, gender identity or pregnancy.
What they’re saying
Texas Rep. Erin Zwiener, D-Driftwood, addressed the board of trustees and Superintendent Holly Morris-Kuentz in a letter April 22, urging them to not go forward with the policy changes to protect LGBTQ students.
“This proposal would take [DSISD] backwards,” Zwiener wrote. “As a state legislator for [DSISD] and a parent, I have had many LGBTQ students and their parents share their stories of bullying within the ISD.”
Texas Rep. Carrie Isaac, R-Dripping Springs, spoke during public comment April 22, supporting the policy changes.
She argued there is "no need for additional manufactured protected classes” in the nondiscrimination policy as there are already “extensive protections against discrimination” in federal laws.
“Language that specifically points out one group over another does not bring equality,” Isaac said. “This divides us when you protect one class over another.”
Isaac encouraged community members to speak in support of the changes prior to the board meeting, stating, “[s]ome DSISD school board members are considering removing ‘gender identity and sexual orientation’ as a protected class from DSISD policies, a decision we should support.”
DSISD parent Penelope Frohlich said it doesn’t make sense to remove the language for redundancy, as other language referencing protected classes in the policy is technically also redundant.
“I just can’t see how there’s any dilemma,” Frohlich said. “Removing these specific words will only make my child and other LGBTQ students less safe and protected and more vulnerable to discrimination and harassment without providing any identifiable benefit.”
Zwiener wrote in her letter that while discrimination against LGBTQ people is sex discrimination, including the terms is not repetitive as the legal landscape is still unclear and doesn’t yet fully apply to schools yet.
DSISD parent Rob Mamula spoke April 22 in support of the potential changes.
“I am concerned about the sexualization of our children,” Mamula said. “I’m concerned about getting ideologies into the school that have no business being there.”
School board candidate and DSISD parent Terri Purdy spoke during public comment, and said local districts can modify and create their own policies as long as they comply with federal law.
“The removal of this language is not required by federal law,” Purdy said. “TASB suggests model language for policies and that may be where the confusion is coming from.”
Nonprofit Pride of Dripping Springs board member Christopher Roberson told Community Impact that removing the terms that already exist in the policy “does communicate something to the LGBTQ population.”
What’s next
The board of trustees will continue to deliberate on the policy changes and seek additional legal counsel on the revisions.
“A district can certainly include additional gender-related terms in their local policies if that’s what the school board chooses to do,” Wood said. “Again, local policy is a local decision.”
Board members will vote on any potential policy changes in a future board meeting. The next board voting meeting will take place May 20.
“The DSISD board of trustees and administration stand firm that bullying and discrimination are unacceptable and will not be tolerated, including if based on a person’s status as part of the [LGBTQ] community,” Reinold said in a statement April 22. “We care for the welfare and protection of all students and staff, including those in the [LGBTQ] community.”
To review the redline of the proposed policy revisions, click here. For more information on the district’s Title IX compliance, click here.
