Loyal School Board maintains Title IX decision

By Valorie Brecht The Loyal School Board has decided to maintain its decision of not adopting the new federal Title IX regulations, as they are still being contested in the court system. At its Oct. 21 meeting, the board decided to uphold its motion first made in July and amended in August to state, “The Loyal School Board will abide by the federal Title IX law and suspend all considerations and implementation of the new Title IX rules until the litigation is final.”

Title IX is a 1972 civil rights act intended to protect women and girls from discrimination in school. Earlier this year, the Department of Education under the direction of the Biden administration released new Title IX regulations. Among other changes, the new regulations expand the definition of “sex” to include “sexual orientation and gender identity,” and were supposed to go into effect Aug. 1. Opponents of the new regulations argue that the regulations would require people who identify as transgender be allowed to use the restroom or locker room of their choosing, as well as mandate the use of a trans-identifying person’s “preferred pronouns” in a school setting.

Twenty-six states plus hundreds of schools filed injunctions to stop the implementation of the new regulations. On Aug. 16, the U.S. Supreme Court denied the Biden administration’s request to allow most of its Title IX rule to take effect in places where courts have issued preliminary injunctions temporarily blocking the rule, giving the rationale that “the new definition of sex discrimination is intertwined with and affects other provisions of the rule.” The block is temporary, as the Biden administration is appealing decisions in the lower courts.

Wisconsin was not among the 26 states to file an injunction, meaning the new regulations would still be required by law. However, Moms for Liberty filed an injunction against the implementation of Title IX, so schools with parents who are part of Moms for Liberty are covered under that injunction.

The issue was brought up locally after the Abbotsford School District had complaints filed against it in early October from LGBTQ+ advocacy groups Fair Wisconsin and GSAFE. The Abbotsford School Board initially voted to adopt the new Title IX regulations, but then rescinded that motion after hearing from concerned parents and consulting with an attorney. GSAFE and Fair Wisconsin have filed complaints against Abbotsford and four other Wisconsin school districts, saying they want these school districts to revisit their vote and add sexual orientation and gender identity as a protected class under Title IX.

In light of that situation, Loyal School District Administrator Chris Lindner scheduled a meeting for the Loyal board to revisit the issue and have a conversation about it. The special school board meeting took place after the district’s annual meeting and began with a public comment period. Two members of the public opted to speak: Grace Genteman and Kim Bremmer, both of whom had/have students in the Loyal school system.

Genteman spoke against the Title IX amendment. “There are too many questionable items in the amendment. Please teach our children reading, writing and arithmetic, not gender ideology. We are here to protect our children, not confuse them with lies. The Title IX amendment will take rights away from parents and give them to the government. The parents are the number-one teacher of our children. The school needs to respect parents and not undermine them by telling the children things that we, the parents, don’t want them taught. If there are concerns regarding our children, the school should not be permitted to keep this secret from parents. I will ask you this: how many students will you lose if you approve the Title IX amendment? How many will you gain?

“Our children are a special gift. Please don’t sell out our children for money. Protect our children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren by saying ‘no’ to the Title IX amendment.”

Bremmer provided some legal context on the situation. “There’s been some pressure on local school boards especially after Abbotsford being challenged by Fair Wisconsin and GSAFE, southern Wisconsin activist groups. I just want you to better understand that those are complaints that go to the OCR, the Office of Civil Rights. It’s not really a lawsuit like we think of litigation; it’s asking the OCR to open an investigation, which is this really big, long process. It would be a long time before it would ever get to the point where Abbotsford or other schools put in this situation would have to worry about losing federal funding.

“There’s also Southeastern Legal Foundation; they represent a group called Moms for Liberty. There’s an injunction because of a lawsuit in Kansas, and that injunction covers a big part of the U.S., including Wisconsin. So technically speaking, if you have Moms for Liberty members in your district, your school is not required to comply with the new regulations. And Loyal does have members in all three schools — elementary, middle and high school. So you’re not really required to do this even though you’re getting pressure, whether it’s from DPI (the Department of Public Instruction) or school attorneys who are worried about what’s being called possible ‘litigation’ like what other districts are facing in the state. Just wanted to know that you really had a lot of cover and you’re not required to do it.”

Lindner said he had investigated the issue, along with principals Angie Kollmansberger and Justin Stoegbauer, and school board member Derek Weyer. He said he had also talked to a number of other school superintendents, who brought up the Moms for Liberty group.

“I was not aware that we had members all the way through, so that does cover us… And we sat in on a Wisconsin Institute of Law and Liberty (seminar) today — Derek and I, Angie and Justin — and that was, I thought, informative. And they were in the same boat — you didn’t have to have a (Moms for Liberty) member at a certain date; you just had to have a member throughout the levels of schools, not districts… In knowing that, we are covered. And if the board wants to continue to wait with litigation, I feel we are in compliance,” Lindner said.

Lindner asked if there were any other comments, and Weyer spoke.

“I would like to add that Title IX is not new. For 52 years, Title IX was adopted and received pretty well and two years ago there was a major change, and that’s what we were questioning. I think when this was originally brought to the board we all kind of agreed morally and ethically that we did not agree with it. And I agree with what Grace said tonight about words do have meaning, and saying nothing and complying is not always the right thing to do,” said Weyer.

“So I would support reverting back to our original Title IX policy, and essentially keeping the motion that (school board member) Holly (Lindner) amended, that we do not conform with the current Title IX policies.”

He also noted that in talking with the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, they were careful to point out they were not giving legal advice; they are attorneys, but working for a non-profit they can not provide the board with a formal legal advice. However, they provided a lot of information and documentation for the school district to review.

“They are following this extremely close. I feel it was a very beneficial 27-minute teleconference,” said Weyer.

Lindner said the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty referenced the same thing Bremmer did, that there was a difference between complaints and actual lawsuits, and that in the 52 years of Title IX, the Department of Education had not withheld funds from schools because of a situation like this.

Since the board decided not to change their original motion, they were not required to vote on anything. However, they all verbally agreed or nodded to indicate they were fine with leaving the motion in place and not implementing the new regulations.

Other local school districts have taken different approaches to dealing with the Title IX regulations. The Greenwood and Spencer school districts both opted to approve the new regulations, at their July meetings.