Translate this page

FUHSD adopts gender variant regulation


Thursday, January 16th, 2014
Issue 03, Volume 18.
Debbie Ramsey
Managing Editor
You need Flash player 8+ and JavaScript enabled to view this video.


The board of trustees of the Fallbrook Union High School District (FUHSD) voted 4-1 on Monday, Jan. 13, with Richard Goodlake abstaining, to approve new Administrative Regulation 5145.31, as a result of California Governor Jerry Brown signing Assembly Bill (AB) 1266 into law last year, allowing transgender youth to participate on whichever sports team and use whatever restroom and locker room facilities fit their gender identity, regardless of their birth gender.

FUHSD Superintendent Dale Mitchell, Ed.D. said in a written recommendation to the board, "Whether individuals agree or disagree with the law, the district has a responsibility to follow it. The administrative regulation and communication strategies are designed to support staff in implementing the legal requirements associated with this new law."

AB 1266 first appeared on the FUHSD board agenda in October as an informational item, however, it was not brought forward for approval at that time due to widespread indications throughout the state that enough signatures might be gained to make it a ballot measure, resulting in a suspension of implementation. Since that did not occur, AB 1266 went into law on Jan. 1.

FUHSDís new administrative regulation provides for privacy for students in keeping with their actual or perceived sexual orientation. It restricts school personnel from disclosing a studentís identity in that regards to others, including but not limited to other students, parents, and/or other school personnel, unless there is a specific "need to know."

In the new guidelines, it reaffirms that FUHSD is required to maintain mandatory permanent pupil records which include the legal name of the pupil and the pupilís sex. However, the district is to change a studentís official records in those if legal documentation is provided to demonstrate official change.

Restroom use

Schools can still maintain separate restroom facilities for male and female students, however students are to have access to the restroom that corresponds to their gender identity asserted at school. Also provides that "If a student feels that there is a reason or desire for increased privacy and safety, regardless of the underlying purpose or cause, the administrator is to provide the student with access to a reasonable alternative restroom such as a single stall "gender neutral" restroom or the health office restroom.

"In terms of physical changes to our facilities, there is no intention to immediately make any changes; we are going to be hopeful that we can work with students in order to make accommodations so that all students are comfortable and that we are fulfilling the expectations of the law," said Mitchell. "At Ivy High School, because we are currently going through a modernization project, we are looking at establishing a non-gender restroom that can be used."

Locker room use

In the same vein as restrooms, schools may maintain separate locker room facilities for male and female students, however, students are to be allowed access to the locker room facility that corresponds to their gender identity asserted at school. However, is there is a reason or request for more privacy and safety, regardless of the reason, students are to be provided access to a reasonable alternative locker room situation, which could be a private area inside a locker room that is separated by a curtain, door, etc., or a nearby private area. Another alternative offered by the school could be a separate changing schedule so the student could utilize the locker room before or after other students.

As with restrooms, Mitchell said, "We are not, at the moment, making any facility changes at Fallbrook High School." However, they will honor the requests of students and make appropriate arrangements.

Mitchell said the district staff has discussed the new law at length and worked to understand it and its implementation elements. In addition, two different legal firms were consulted with for understanding and direction and sample procedural guidelines from the Los Angeles Unified School District were taken into consideration.

Respecting all students needs and rights will be paramount for FUHSD administration, the superintendent said.

"Fundamentally we have to protect the rights of all students, thatís our primary goal," said Mitchell.


 

37 comments

Comment Profile ImageRay (the real one)
Comment #1 | Thursday, Jan 16, 2014 at 5:44 pm
Nonsense...... I wish some Northern California legislator pulled this nonsense when I was in school. Guess which bathroom or locker room I would use.

This only causes more problems for the " confused" child incouraging even more bullies and stigmas.

I know, teachers and school districts care about kids....... Yeah Right.
Comment Continued : The comment above was written from the same location.
Post Continued
Comment Profile ImageRay (the real one)
Comment #2 | Thursday, Jan 16, 2014 at 6:26 pm
Today, I really care less, don`t have any kids in the "Granola State" schools. What gives our governor and legislators pass such "foolish" legislation and to tell parents how to raise their children.

If a parent passes on allowing their young children to attend the school, is the parent going to be given the opportunity to send their kids to private school and refund "all portions" of taxes that parent pays, I don`t think so.

What "Califoolya" is taking the rights of the one over the many, unacceptable. It would befar cheaper and better off for these "really confused children" to a county-wide specialschool for the sexually challenged, I have a better word but to avoid the "red pen" , I`ll keep it clean.

I don`t know about you but the stare by passing this "foolish" legislation only causes these children to redicule or even harm. Some cultures that attend Fallbrook schools treat "homosexuality", don`t try to explain it, thiat is what some will consider it no matter what you say.

I am a constitutionalist, meaning, I respect the rights of others as long as it does not deprive mine or my families. I have always said why should a 90 year old woman, property owner pay for schools? Pay as you go folks but one problem....

The people who "flooded" our schools, most live in poverty, no english speaking and tend to have a large number of children costing you and I more for education. Where soes it say in any book, bill or rights, constititution, articles of confederation?

Only place it referenced clearly is the "feferaslist papers" and that is considered "minutes" with no legal standing. When I was a kid, not too long ago, the 1960`s, All I received was a building, teacher, chair, bagged my lunch, and books. Today schools are surrogate parents at our cost folks.

School boards, teachers unions resist "all" change, wonder why? fat pensions, 10 month working years salaries, tenure, nobody in "any" sector" gets this, well Obozo and Michelle do.

I really hope that one of these "sexually challenged" kids does not loose their lives, all for political stupidity.
Comment Continued : The comment above was written from the same location.
Post Continued
Comment Profile ImageRay (the real one)
Comment #3 | Thursday, Jan 16, 2014 at 6:31 pm
Sorry, Android phone typos.
Comment Continued : The comment above was written from the same location.
Post Continued
Comment Profile ImageRay (the real one)
Comment #4 | Thursday, Jan 16, 2014 at 6:37 pm
BEST LAW, ever passed...

"Don`t ask, don`t tell"

Works for me.

Waiting for the "Matthew Sheppard" coments, ready, locked and loaded. Going to be a long week.
Comment Profile Imagereally?
Comment #5 | Thursday, Jan 16, 2014 at 7:12 pm
This is absurd.
Comment Profile ImageFallbrook Student
Comment #6 | Thursday, Jan 16, 2014 at 9:34 pm
Thats great, I wonder who will be the first boy to decide he wants to go change with the girls, because of course you won't be able to question what the individual says. That might hurt their feelings and be discriminatory.
Comment Profile ImageCarla
Comment #7 | Friday, Jan 17, 2014 at 11:09 am
This is great! Pretty amazing that in conservative Fallbrook this passed with no dissentions and only one board member hiding behind an abstention. Acceptance, tolerance and multiculturalism, it is the future!
Comment Profile ImageRay (the real one)
Comment #8 | Friday, Jan 17, 2014 at 11:40 am
If anyone of these "emotional hermaphrodite" children suffer injury or death because our politicians want to toss our children to the lioons for political correctness, the governor, most if not all bone head democrats and some stupid republicans, all school administrators should be arrested, charged, convicted and jailed for their crimes.

Let`s hope Johnny does not jump off the Bonsall bridge.
Comment Profile ImageRay (the real one)
Comment #9 | Friday, Jan 17, 2014 at 12:49 pm
Well... the red pen again. You know these children will be bullied, picked on and maybe even physically assaulted all for political correctness.

I hope the appropriate people are convicted. Sacramento will be an empty place.
Comment Profile Imagegrunt
Comment #10 | Friday, Jan 17, 2014 at 2:25 pm
Carla- why is tolerance your mantra only when it is in-tolerant of Christian values?
Comment Profile ImageBud
Comment #11 | Friday, Jan 17, 2014 at 2:54 pm
The bathrooms and gym should remain available to the appropriate anatomic gender or chromosomal gender. The "feeling" of identity with one gender or another is psycho.
Comment Profile ImageLen
Comment #12 | Friday, Jan 17, 2014 at 3:39 pm
This quote is not accurate: "......... Since that did not occur, AB 1266 went into law on Jan. 1." This law has not been implemented due to collection of enough valid signatures the place it on the ballot. It's reasonable for the school to prepare to implement this idiot law if it is not overturned via ballot, but I don't believe, when California has a chance to vote, that it will survive. If this bill were originally put to a vote, it would not have survived. If we had anyone, but governor moonbeam, it would not have survived. It is just insane that we even have to spend time and resources on this. Stupid, Stupid, Stupid California. When are you going to wake up?
Comment Profile ImageRay (the real one)
Comment #13 | Friday, Jan 17, 2014 at 5:05 pm
Grunt: In regards to Carla, add latinos (law breakers to her list.
Comment Profile ImageLibs are intolerant
Comment #14 | Friday, Jan 17, 2014 at 5:44 pm
Carla and the rest of the liberals: why is intolerance any opinion that doesn't agree with you? Aren't people allowed to have different opinions without being called intolerant? Do Christians have any rights? As long as you and other left wingers push a politically correct agenda, assinine laws such as this will still be put into affect, defying all logic to the majority of the populace.
Comment Profile ImageStraight but not narrow
Comment #15 | Friday, Jan 17, 2014 at 6:01 pm
Oh my, somebody has to share a bathroom. How frightening! Glad this law passed.
Comment Profile ImageRay (the real one)
Comment #16 | Friday, Jan 17, 2014 at 6:26 pm
In a democratic society, nobody actually has equal rights, some in society will have less. Example in the judicial system, same case, one has a high priced attorney, the other a public defender, who do you think has more rights?

In reality, rights are not absolute, they can be suspended at any time. Case in point felons and 4th waivers. The government can suspend your citizenship, although rarely happens, it`s happened.

The poor is another example but with this law is completely nonsense and very dangerous for the few is is suppose to protect. Each district might have ten gender challenged students in a total population of thousands in the district. You you disrupt a whole district for a few children who would be better served in an environment devoted to their needs.

Kids are vicious, they will make life for these challenged students a living hell. What do we do, pay for police protection for each child from k-12? What happens when a group of kids in hoodies beat the tar out of this child?

These children have emotional problems now, why add more to the mix. What our legislators did was say "screw the many for the few" in the name of political correctness, tossed these children "under the bus" knowing these children are in serious risk" for votes.

What about the many other parents trying to raise their kids, tough today with all the pop culture they are exposed to have such nonsense. These parents own homes, pay taxes, their property taxes pay for schools usually for many years. Taxes which pay for staffing, salaries and other expenses to ensure kids in California get a quality education only to be given the "F" bomb in regards to the few over the many.

Now I understand the situation but an environment setup to deal with these children would be better with consulsing, peer and if necessary the proper hormone treatments than tossing them in the lions cage.

Folks, Carla can`t see the forest through the trees, to her it`s diversity but she fails to see the harm it WILL cause. Most liberals think their motive is good, but destructive in application than they stand back and say oops.

I am glad I don`t have children in California schools and feel sorry for the millions who do.
Comment Continued : The comment above was written from the same location.
Post Continued
Comment Profile ImageRay (the real one)
Comment #17 | Friday, Jan 17, 2014 at 6:33 pm
Carla, Once again,. that South Central University education, does it include a civics class?

The conservative community of Fallbrook,the administrator of a school district MUST follow California. I think that if the FBVN conducted a poll, the majority would reject the law but until it`s overturned by a ballot measure, we must live with the damage.

Unlike Mexico Carla, our government functions and differel, the peoploe have the final say.

Civics lesson ended.
Comment Profile ImageElissa
Comment #18 | Friday, Jan 17, 2014 at 6:58 pm
I find it absolutely appalling that children attending public schools will be forced into "acceptance" of this lunacy! It's a really sad time in which we live, where government dictates societal norms.
Comment Profile ImageLizzie
Comment #19 | Friday, Jan 17, 2014 at 9:23 pm
Correct, the law does not go into effect until referendum is determined. Please pray.
Comment Profile ImageKenD
Comment #20 | Friday, Jan 17, 2014 at 9:31 pm
What a travesty! What about the other kids who like to maintain their birth sexuality? Looks to me like those kids rights are being violated. Why are they being forced to deal with a person of the opposite sex (yes there is a difference whether you like it or not) entering a dressing room or toilet with them? Something has gone terribly wrong with our society. Our "straight" kids are being subjected to a situation that is being forced upon them with no escape. It is shameful. Not only should the Governor, but also the local school board be ashamed of themselves for forcing this issue down our "straight"kids.
Comment Profile ImageJim
Comment #21 | Friday, Jan 17, 2014 at 9:55 pm
AB1266 did NOT go into effect Jan. 1 as stated. We are being duped, lied to, and deceived by the board of trustees and Supt. Mitchell - or they should have better done their research prior to taking this action. See the following:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
January 16, 2014
Contact: Karen England

Co-ED Bathroom Law Not In Effect

Sacramento, CA-A leading California education and public agency law firm today issued a statement confirming that AB 1266 did not go into effect on January 1. Some proponents of the "co-ed bathroom law" have put forth the idea that the law became effective at the first of the year, despite a referendum effort designed to put the measure on the November ballot.

Fresno based Lozano Smith, LP, notes that AB 1266 was signed by Governor Brown last year but "a referendum challenge was mounted to prevent AB 1266 from becoming law, and the referendum effort has caused the effective date to be put on hold."

Backers of the referendum to overturn the new law believe that some individuals are trying to get local policies in place before the referendum process is concluded and might try to retain those policies even after the law is struck down.

"Districts throughout the State are acting as if the co-ed bathroom law is in effect," said Gina Gleason, proponent of the referendum. "While some individuals just don't understand the referendum process, others are ignoring the referendum to advance their agenda.

Karen England, a spokesperson for Privacy For All Students, says her organization is calling on school officials to respect the law and the peoples' right to challenge laws with a referendum. "Now they have been told definitively that the co-ed bathroom law has not taken effect. It will be interesting to see what these districts do. Will they side with a vocal minority threatening the privacy and safety of our children, or will they follow the law?"

Backers of the referendum presented nearly 620,000 signatures to elections officials in November. While the Secretary of State is still reviewing these signatures, the law was suspended upon presentation of those signatures.

For more information about the referendum to overturn California's co-ed bathroom law, visit the PFAS web page at www.privacyforallstudents.com
Comment Continued : The comment above was written from the same location.
Post Continued
Comment Profile ImageThe Truth about AB 1266
Comment #22 | Friday, Jan 17, 2014 at 10:25 pm
From Capitol Resource Institute:

Co-Ed Bathroom Law Not in Effect

The media and liberal politicians are doing their best to scare school officials into implementing AB 1266 right away.

I am frustrated by the dishonesty of those attempting to force this dangerous law on schools. For some school officials it does not take much convincing, but for others they are leery as they see the co-ed bathroom law for what it really is; a violation of privacy, an attack on children's safety, and an unnecessary policy.

The media is reporting that AB 1266 is now in effect and must be implemented by every school in the state of California. This is NOT true. With the submission of signatures in November, AB 1266 has been suspended until the rest of the referendum process is completed.

We must educate those who are implementing this policy under the false idea that it is already in effect. As concerned parents, grandparents, teachers, and citizens we must tell our schools that it is not permissible to implement AB 1266.

Let protecting the privacy and innocence of our schoolchildren in California embolden you to make sure AB 1266 is not being prematurely and wrongfully implemented.
Comment Profile ImagePT
Comment #23 | Friday, Jan 17, 2014 at 10:50 pm
How could anyone vote for this. There is a SMALL number of students that have gender difficulties and they should be allowed to live there life with out persecution . But to force the majority of the students to live that life style is wrong.

You want to teach hatred of gays---then try to FORCE others to accept it as normal. The vast majority of people really don't care and believe in tolerance of all people. . You want to see more objections to the gay life style--just keep forcing it down our throat. The Politicians are ding it to secure votes.

I am sure that the regulations have punishment for those kids that oppose the gay life style being forced on them. Heaven protect any kids with religious convictions. Sorry, I forgot religion (at least christian) is banned from schools.

Most people are afraid to say anything, we may be labeled a homophobe or something so we smile and shut up. It has been shown the adults won't object to any minority agenda. Question is will the adults allow this attack on there children .

We should teach kids to like people for who they are and that does not mean we must accept everything that they do.

If you love your children consider getting them out of the government schools.
Comment Profile Imagedave
Comment #24 | Saturday, Jan 18, 2014 at 1:12 am
wow how pathetic fallbrook is becoming
Comment Profile ImageBlessed be the meek...
Comment #25 | Saturday, Jan 18, 2014 at 9:53 am
Why would someone think that true Christians would be opposed to this? We are supposed to love all people and if this makes life better for my transgendered brethren then I say good. LGBT people please remember that what is being directed toward you on this page is not the teachings of the Lord, but is only the hate of men.

Galations 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus
Comment Profile ImageFHS MOM
Comment #26 | Saturday, Jan 18, 2014 at 6:49 pm
IF some dude shows up in my daughters locker room or bathroom, we will be pulling her out of this school so fast it will make your head spin. And other parents will do the same. Why should my child have to be made scared and uncomfortable in a place where she should be guaranteed some measure of safety. It's just a matter of time before this ruling is abused by someone and the court case will include people all the way to the governor. Put it to a vote - just say no.
Comment Profile ImageSong
Comment #27 | Sunday, Jan 19, 2014 at 1:14 am
Yes AB1266! Hate loses every time!
Comment Profile ImageFallbrook Conservative
Comment #28 | Sunday, Jan 19, 2014 at 8:32 am
Len - You are incorrect...there were NOT enough signatures collected by January 1st so AB1266 IS law and IS in effect. The FUHSD Board of Trustees must follow what is currently law.
Comment Profile ImageFallbrook mom
Comment #29 | Sunday, Jan 19, 2014 at 11:18 am
Some of the parents here should be more interested in their children's academic fulfillment and less interested in the plumbing of the kid in the adjacent stall. I and my husband have no problem with this new law. In fact we support it.
Comment Profile ImagePink
Comment #30 | Sunday, Jan 19, 2014 at 1:36 pm
@Carla: Why do you "assume" that Grunt is white? Sounds a bit like intolerance to me for you to say that. Do you hate white people? I have an African American son in law that will probably go ballistic if some boy walks into my granddaughters bathroom and makes a move on her. I don't want any student bullied, no matter who they are. The concern that I have is that teenage boys, being what they are, will use this as an excuse to go into the girls bathroom/locker room to see what they can see. I think we both know that the first time a young woman is sexually harassed or raped due to this stupid law the school district will sued out of existence, along with individual members of the school board. Why oh why can't we just start teaching kids to be nice to each other when they are young. Bullying needs to be stopped, period. All this law does is put a band aid on a bullet wound.
Comment Profile ImageFallbrook Dad
Comment #31 | Sunday, Jan 19, 2014 at 4:23 pm
Why can't the high school order porta-potties and label them "others".
Comment Profile ImageCarla
Comment #32 | Sunday, Jan 19, 2014 at 6:57 pm
@32 Pink. My first remark is directed at grunt. My second is directed to the maker of comment #1 and his statement.

Would your son-in-law be more comfortable if his daughter were attacked elsewhere?

This law simply codifies statewide what has been standard practice in some of the largest school districts in the state now for years. Do some research, please.

http://sdusd-newsfeed.blogspot.com/2014/01/san-diego-unifieds-practices-in-line.html
Comment Profile ImageRay (the real one)
Comment #33 | Monday, Jan 20, 2014 at 1:49 am
Carla: Sorry, not that old and considering where I grew up, pretty liberal in some respects but I do know stupid when I see it and this law falls under that catagory.

I at least I know not to disrupt an entire district for a few foul balls.

If you attended an ivy league university, can you get a refund on that tuition?

Book smarts is one thing but other kinds of smarts have to be learned and earned.
Comment Profile ImageJim
Comment #34 | Monday, Jan 20, 2014 at 2:33 am
Re: Fallbrook Conservative (comment #30) - You are misinformed! AB 1266 is NOT in effect. Please do the research.

619,000 of 504,760 needed signatures were submitted by the November 12 deadline (originally slanted for Nov. 10). Validation of these signatures is still in process and the results will likely not be available until early February. For this reason the enactment of the bill has been stayed/suspended and the law will go into effect ONLY IF the signatures are determined to be inadequate or the voters approve the law on the November ballot.

The Pacific Justice Institute wrote to all school trustees and administrators on January 14 to advise them that AB 1266 HAS NOT GONE INTO EFFECT because the presentation of the requisite signatures for a referendum stays/suspends the bill.

We must await the validation of signatures - but, regardless of the outcome, it is abundantly apparent that the FUHSD ignorantly jumped the gun on this one without doing the research it no doubt requires of its students. Shame on them!
Comment Profile ImageBonsallGayGuy
Comment #35 | Monday, Jan 20, 2014 at 7:23 am
The Village News article is indeed correct. AB1266 came into full effect as of January 1, 2014. Although a referendum petition has been filed with the California Secretary of State's office to put the question before the voters, that referendum to date has not yet been qualified for the ballot. Signatures are still being reviewed. After this review process is completed and only if this referendum is then qualified to be placed on the ballot, at that point is the law put into abeyance until decided by the voters at the next general election. The mere submission of unverified signatures does not undo legislation once signed by the Governor. This is the way the referendum process works here in the State of California. For at least the time being like it or not, AB1266 is in fact the law.

As to what is now going on behind the scenes, the proponents of repeal have in fact successfully submitted more than enough aggregate (but yet unverified) signatures. According to the normal procedures for qualifying a referendum for the ballot these signatures were first subjected to random review. During this review enough signatures were found to be invalid as to warrant a full check of each and every signature. This by itself is an incredibly laborious task (we're talking 600,000 plus signatures, each being individually examined). Compounding this, you have a tug of war going on between proponents and opponents over the validity of each signature. By the way, this situation is not extraordinary. It routinely happens all the time over contentious referenda and initiative proposals during the qualification process for the ballot. As of the end of the business day on Friday the 17th, 13,659 signatures have been reviewed out of 619,244 submitted. The CA Secretary of State has a deadline of February 24th to complete this process and hopefully announce the result.
http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/pend_sig/full-check-1598-011714.pdf


For those interested, the California Secretary of State's Office will issue periodic updates regarding the signature validation process. These updates can be obtained at:
http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/ballot-measures/pending-signature-verification.htm


For those interested in greater detail how the California referendum process works, one might wish to look at this:
http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/ballot-measures/referenda.htm
Comment Profile ImagePink
Comment #36 | Monday, Jan 20, 2014 at 9:31 am
I apologize Carla, I misread your statement. I read it as "I" guess without noticing the @ sign (must not have been wearing my reading glasses (-:) you were addressing Ray not Grunt. I'm afraid you are probably correct about Ray, Grunt on the other hand has never said anything even remotely racist that I can recall. I remember in my early teens visiting the south and actually seeing the "whites only" signs. It made me upset and angry.

As for my son in law, of course he would not be not be comfortable, don't be childish. He also does his best not to put her in harms way. I can't believe that a young woman, as savvy as you are, doesn't realize that there are predators out there, even in high schools. I very much fear that somewhere a young woman is going to pay a high price for political correctness. Laws like this will only cause more students to be taken out of public schools and put into private ones.
Comment Profile ImageMelinda Paredes
Comment #37 | Monday, Jan 20, 2014 at 9:38 am
Bonsall gay guy, right on! Sorry Jim, the only ignorant person is you and your hate group the California Research Institute. You and your friends over at the CRI and Pacific Justice can keep blabbering that line all you want. It won't make it true.

Sorry, this story is no longer accepting comments.
RSS FeedFacebookTwitter



Advertisement for Fallbrook Healthcare Partners





Subscribe




Most Commented


Reach Local Customers



The Fallbrook Village News The Fallbrook Village News
760-723-7319 - 1588 S. Mission Rd. Suite 200, Fallbrook CA 92028
All contents copyright ©2014
About Us
Earthquake Information
Business Listings
Contact Us
Letter to the Editor
Report a website error
Sitemap
Online Digital Edition
RSS Feeds
Login