[ad_1]
NEW HANOVER COUNTY — A majority of the New Hanover County Board of Education voted to send a controversial amendment on transgender sports participation back to the Policy Board.
Policy 3620 outlines the participation requirements for extracurricular activities and student organizations. In June 2021, the board voted her 5-2 to amend the policy to allow middle school students to play on sports teams that aligned with their gender identity. (High school participation should be based on assigned gender or with approval from the North Carolina High School Athletic Association).
read more: NHCSB members cite First Amendment, Bible in debate to shorten activist curfew
The proposed amendments will be reviewed by a newly appointed Policy Committee led by Board Chair Pete Wildbohr. He nominated Republican Josie Barnhardt as chairman, joined by fellow party member Melissa Mason. Democrat Hugh McManus, who voted against passing the amendment last year, is the third member.
The participation of transgender students in sports is a national topic and part of a larger debate on the rights of LGBTQ+ minors. Several states with Republican-dominated legislatures have restricted access to sports and often prohibit transgender girls and women from participating in women’s teams. proposed passing a similar bill last year, but it didn’t make it to the House of Representatives.
House Speaker Tim Moore (Republican, Cleveland, Rutherford) told the Associated Press that “we haven’t really heard any complaints about that being an issue,” so there’s no need to take up the bill at that point. said no.
Community members have already started condemning Tuesday’s actions. A petition criticizing discriminatory policies and actions was signed by 284 community members.
Jessica Cannon, co-founder of the liberal education accountability group Suit Up Wilmington, emailed Bradford the day after the conference.
“There may be reasons to vote for this vote, but please understand that it will be viewed as homophobic and punitive by LGBTQ+ children in our county,” Cannon said. When it’s to protect all children in public schools, not just those your religion or political party deems acceptable.”
At the school board meeting Tuesday, Vice Chair Pat Bradford expressed concern about the passage of last year’s amendment. During her agenda review, she requested that the policy discussion be added for “procedural” reasons, which passed 5-2. Stephanie Walker and Stephanie Kraybill objected.
When the board reached its agenda hours later, Bradford argued that the previous board had violated policy when they voted to waive the first reading of the amendment in June 2021.
“We got it wrong that night,” she said during the meeting.
It is common for the board to present policy at the first meeting, but that is the first reading and awaits vote at the second meeting. However, Policy 2410 stipulates that his second reading is not required to amend current policy, but new policy is proposed and not voted on at the same meeting. As long as an amendment is on the agenda, the Board can vote on it.
The proposed amendments to Policy 2620 actually passed the first two readings. It was first returned to the Policy Board in April 2021. The June meeting is the second.
The vote to abandon June’s first reading was 4 to 3, with Walker and former board members Nelson Beaulieu, Stephanie Adams and Judy Justice in favor. Wildeboer, McManus, and Kraybill dissenting. However, Clayville approved the policy amendment in a subsequent vote.
Beaulieu led an effort to avoid the first reading by participating via video call. Wildeboer confirmed Tuesday before the meeting’s conclusion, she asked for an explanation as to whether Beaulieu had violated policy.
Policy 2302 states: ”
Under the same policy, virtually participating Board members may not vote on agenda items not present at the discussion. Also, Board members should be excluded from voting if the connection was interrupted during the discussion and the meeting was not interrupted so that the connection could be resumed. The Board did not raise any of these issues during its June ballot.
Wildeboer did not return a request for clarification by the press, so it is unclear whether he was suggesting at Tuesday’s meeting that possible violations from Beaulieu would invalidate the vote.
During the discussion, Claybill spoke candidly about why other Republican board members wanted to cancel the first reading vote.
“I think this is a backdoor attempt to deprive transgender students of their rights and not provide equal opportunities for all students,” she said at the conference. Say it out loud
The Port City Daily reached out to Bradford to discuss the policy. She said she wouldn’t have time to do so.
A vote to cancel the first reading was passed 4 to 3. Mason, Clayville, and Walker objected. The latter two of his cited concerns about violating Title IX and stripping transgender students of their protections. Mason was quiet during the pre-vote discussion and did not respond to PCD on her reasons. McManus also did not respond to requests for comment by the press.
Bradford then submitted a motion to vote on an amendment to the policy, claiming it was now on its second reading. She was reminded by her NHCS attorney that the board was barred from acting on the policy because it was not on the published agenda.
Recommendations from the Policy Committee not currently scheduled to meet are returned to the Board for a final vote. In the June 2021 ballot, Walker and Clayville voted in favor of the amendment, while Wildboer and McManus voted against.
The Port City Daily asked Barnhart if he plans to amend Policy 3620.
“At this time, we are gathering input from board members,” said Barnhart.
Contact journalist Brenna Flanagan at brenna@localdailymedia.com.
Want to read more about PCD? Apply now Sign up for our newsletter and wilmington wireget headlines delivered to your inbox every morning.
[ad_2]
Source link
