HOLLIDAYSBURG — The Hollidaysburg Area School Board decided to table the second vote for the policy proposed to address political and sexual orientation symbols and discussions in the classroom in the fallout of the “Gender Queer” controversy.
The board, however, did unanimously approve a policy banning teachers from initiating discussions with students on gender identity and preferred pronouns.
At its latest meeting, this time in the senior high library due to a smaller public turnout, the board voted Wednesday night to table the second reading of Policy 321 regarding political activities in the classroom in favor of having further discussions on clarifications and amendments at the policy committee meeting at the end of the month.
The policy gives guidelines on what is and is not acceptable in terms of conversations and “prominent” displays/symbols — such as flags, signs and posters. Teachers who do not adhere to the policy’s restrictions would be disciplined, which could include termination.
Board member Doug Stephens made the motion to table the reading, saying the language in the code is still too vague. Nicole Hartman echoed his thoughts, saying she has been offering the same criticism since the policy was first proposed.
“I just feel that the policy needs some work, and we’re not there yet,” Stephens said.
Jennifer Costanza asked if this postponement was just a “stall tactic” since the policy had been in discussion for months and no concrete amendments had yet been proposed.
Stephens denied that allegation and Hartman said she has continued to ask board members for clarification on the language such as “brief” discussions or “inconspicuous” that is included in the policy with no response.
The vote was 5-3, with Stephens, Hartman, Scott Brenneman, Lonna Frye and Ronald Sommer in favor and Costanza, Carmen Bilek and Kenneth Snyder opposed. Emanuel Nichols was not present at Wednesday’s meeting.
Once the vote went through, a member of the public got up and walked out of the library, staring in a seemingly aggressive manner at the various members of the board on his way out. Hartman looked confused and seemed to find his behavior off-putting as she looked back at him.
Prior to the vote for Policy 321, the board unanimously approved the second reading of an amendment to Policy 824, which deals with maintaining professional adult/student boundaries on initiating gender identity discussions with students.
In contrast with previous meetings concerning the policies, there was little time spent on public comment. Only three people spoke to the board.
Hollidaysburg Area Education Association president and social studies teacher Mike Rawlins had the same opinion as Hartman and Stephens, saying “this policy is incredibly vague.”
Rawlins was also concerned with the enforcement of the policy, as well as the potential for litigation as a result of the ambiguity.
“Usually when there is vagueness, that leads to lawsuits,” Rawlins said.
Rawlins said teachers across the district are scared and worried about what will happen in their classrooms if Policy 321 is adopted.
“I’ve been a teacher here for 25 years and I’ve never seen anything like this before in this district and it terrifies me,” Rawlins said. “So much so that I’ve never said I’ve been disappointed to be a teacher here in Hollidaysburg, but I can say that now.”
Hollidaysburg resident Trish Haight said both policies were necessary to curb an “epidemic” of gender dysphoria around the country and in Europe.
“I continue to lend my support for the new policy, which keeps the socio-political opinions of the individual teachers, administrators and employees with extreme ideological viewpoints out of the classroom in order to restore academic excellence,” Haight said.
District parent Krista Murphy said Policy 321 would be “impossible” to implement.
“Quite frankly, I am worried that its implementation would lead to chaos … chaos for teachers and students alike,” Murphy said.
Murphy said that because of the vagueness of the language in the policy, teachers will be unsure of what they are allowed to talk about with their students and at what length. She felt that would be a violation of the teachers’ First Amendment right to free speech.
“It would lead teachers to self-censor out of confusion and out of fear,” Murphy said.
Superintendent Robert Gildea said that while he wished the board would have come to a conclusion, he emphasized that the district is prioritizing the well-being of its students, regardless of the board’s eventual decision.
“I’m just looking forward to the board coming to a consensus so we can put this behind us,” Gildea said.
Mirror Staff Writer Nate Powles is at 814-946-7466.
