001I allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which we stand, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Somebody online, >> somebody zooming. Laura, are you all set with attendance? >> Jody is on Zoom. Yes. >> Adjustments to the agenda. >> Adjustments. >> Holly. >> I would like to make a motion that we move public comment to the end of the meeting and we limit it to two minutes per comment. >> Do I have a second? >> I'll second. discussion. >> We have a policy in place that gives them three minutes and if the public wishes to discuss the issue at hand, shouldn't we hear what they have to say before any of the motion? If we put it at the very end,
002then we don't get to hear all the voices and that includes all the sides and any neutral discussion. I feel that's wildly inappropriate. Thank you. We're doing it that way because we have an attorney who's on standby >> and uh still doesn't Billy >> that still doesn't take precedence over public comment and the right of the public to make their comments before we make any decisions. I know it's costing money, but this whole thing is costing us money. >> Any other discussion? We have a motion on the table to move public. >> Ignoring you. >> Oh, she didn't see me. It's okay. Oh, sorry. Sorry. I understand we have a lawyer on standby, but what if we met with a lawyer first, then heard public comment? Then we still get the lawyer. We still hear
003what they have to say. Then we can hear what the public has to say. That way, we don't keep the lawyer waiting. We save ourselves some money that way. And we also hear all the voices before we make our vote. I mean, that makes sense to me. I'm okay with that adjustment. That's what I was thinking. >> Let's recognize speakers. >> We We have >> I'm sorry. Go ahead, Mason. I didn't see >> I I'm just curious what what I I know we have a lawyer on standby. I'm just I believe the public has a right to to comment on anything that we as a board uh decide on before we do so as a publicly elected body. We are there we are here as as uh servants of our our people who elect us.
004So, how how would I just don't understand how democratically that that fits with with what we're charged with doing if we're making if we're having discussions with our with our lawyers and making decisions before hearing from everyone. >> We have a motion on the table right now. >> I would agree. I think we need to listen to the public first. >> Paula, do you want to resend your motion >> or do you want us to vote? >> Okay. All those in favor of moving moving the public comments to the end. >> Uh, point of order. >> Do we have a second on the motion? >> Okay. Thank you. [snorts] >> Yes. Okay. >> Yeah. All those in favor? All those opposed. Okay. He Heather Herish Hish Huish I'm Sorry. >> Hello. My name is Heather
005Hearn Huish. I'm an English teacher at Spruce Mountain High School, but I'm speaking to you tonight as the adviser for our school's GSTA, which stands for gender, sexuality, and trans alliance. We're the group for our school's LGBTQ students. I want to appeal to you tonight to rescend policy ACDC, coordination of federal and state law, that you recently adopted. Are you aware that caring for our LGBTQ students and making them feel accepted is actually suicide prevention? I will now read you some statistics from the Trevor Project, an LGBTQ advocacy organization that is a 24 by7 lifeline for LGBTQ youth providing crisis intervention, suicide prevention, and services like Trevor Chat and Trevor Text. Suicide is the second leading cause of death among young people aged 10 to 24. LGBTQ youth seriously contemplate suicide at almost three times
006the rate of heterosexual youth. LGBTQ youth are almost five times as likely to have attempted suicide compared to heterosexual youth. Of all the suicide attempts made by youth, LGBTQ youth uh suicide attempts were almost five times as likely to require medical treatment than those of heterosexual youth. Sua suicide attempts by LGBTQ youth and questioning youth are four to six times more likely to result in injury, poisoning, or overdose that requires treatment from a doctor or nurse compared to their straight peers. In a national study, 40% of transgender students, I'm going to repeat that, transgender students reported having made suicide attempts. 92% of these individuals reported having attempted suicide before the age of 25. LGBTQ youth who come from highly rejecting families are 8.4 times as likely to have attempted suicide as LGBTQ peers who reported
007no or low levels of family rejection. One out of six students nationwide, grades 9 to 12, seriously considered suicide in the past year. Each episode of EP LGBTQ victimization, such as physical or verbal harassment or abuse, increases the likelihood of selfharming behavior by two and a half times on average. Now, imagine how policy AC/DC makes our LGBTQ students feel about whether they are welcome in the Spruce Mountain School District. Please resend this awful policy to protect our kids. Mike Subalitki. Thank you very much. Good evening, Chairperson Wulette and members of the board. I am State Representative Mike Soilleski and I'm pleased to report that a number of main schools are moving in the right direction, realigning their athletic and instructional policies with federal title 9 standards and refocusing on core academics across the country in
008states like Idaho, Mississippi, and Tennessee have passed laws that restrict gender transgender girls, biological boys from participating in girls sports, citing Title 9's definition of biological sex. Florida, Iowa, and Missouri are scaling back standalone social emotional learning modules, many which many parents and educators have found divisive in favor of proven academic instructions. Here in Maine, several districts, as many as eight, are taking meaningful steps to align with federal law, including Falmouth, Hodgden, uh Spruce Mountain here, Baileyville. These these actions reflect a growing understanding. Federal law supersedes state law under the supremacy clause of the United States Constitution. The main human rights act cannot override a federal mandate. If your council is advising you otherwise, I recommend you seek another opinion. Recently, the DOJ formally requested the MPA turn over complete rosters, including student names and
009school affiliations of every boys and girls sports team over the past two years. Their argument is clear that without consistent biologically based eligibility standards, female athletes may face unfair competition and potential safety risks. Maine leaders and the MPA declined that request citing serious polic uh serious privacy concerns. While the main human rights act offers additional discrim non-discrimination protections, the supremacy clause makes clear that federal title 9 requirements prevail in any conflict. The MPA has clarified that the Maine Human Rights Act does not include mandates for athletics or locker rooms. The only legal question before the US District Court of the District of Maine is whether federal title 9 preempts state law. In March, the HHS office of the Civil Rights found that the main DOE and MPA and Grilly High School in violation of Title
0109 for allowing males in girls sports and private spaces. A temporary restraining order blocking DOJ funding cuts while the preeemption issue is decided is ongoing and the case itself is ongoing. Meanwhile, several school boards across Maine are moving away from separate seal modules and returning to provision proven instructional techniques. These steps bring clarity, comply with federal mandates, and ensure our policies protect every student's privacy, safety, and educational success. And let me say in closing, please don't be bullied. That's what's happening right now. They're trying to the main human rights commission is trying to bully you. Please hold the line. Stay stay on course. >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Ann Weatherbe. >> Good evening. First, just a piece of clarification. It is an executive order, not federal law. It's state law that
011we're that we're in violation of. I'm Anne Witherby. I am from Jay. I am sad and disappointed but not surprised to find that RSU73 is in the position it is now. When school board members voted to violate state law, you were warned by your district attorneys, our superintendent, fellow board members, and numerous community members that the policy would lead to a lawsuit. Now you are asking the town of Livermore, Liverour Falls and Jay to have another set of lawyers to defend your agenda. I am against this policy in so many for so many reasons which I and many others have expressed repeatedly, but tonight I'm offering you a new one. As a taxpayer whose property taxes have increased 59%, I feel that that money could go to much better use than my town paying for
012more legal advice or to settle a lawsuit for violating state law, not federal law. I do not I do want to thank the board members who have been voices of reason and all the community members who have tried to help this board make decisions in the best interests of students and towns. And I hope that your common sense and compassion will prevail today and I am not bullying. >> I love her. Jane Costa Jane Costa J taxpayer. The last time I was here, I tried to explain how Maine RSUs fall under the jurisdiction of state and local laws. That has been the case since 1820 when we became a state. Maine public schools are funded mostly by the state of Maine up to 55%. And then most of the rest comes from the local taxpayers.
013In this case, the three towns who own all of this. The taxpayers of the three towns actually own the RSU. We own the property, everything that's in it. and in conjunction with the state department of education laws. So we govern the local infrastructure and the state is the one who provides the guidance for the laws. It has always been state jurisdiction. This is not federal property. And again, um, the legislature makes the laws and the legislature changes the laws. So, right now, this is in the courts. There's no reason to create a policy for something that actually hasn't come up yet. It hasn't been decided yet. In fact, before January 2025, I don't recall ever hearing about any problems in our school district when it comes to Title 9. I don't even think most of
014the students and people in the area even knew what Title 9 was. And then all of a sudden, January 2025 comes and everyone's talking about Title 20 uh Title Title N. So, you have to ask yourself, why is that? Do we actually even have a problem with Title N? Have there been any complaints? Have there been any investigations about this? No. It seems as though a problem has been created, has been manufactured. And that's not right because it's dragged in all kinds of problems with the kids. And we shouldn't be doing that. We should not be preempting the legal process. It's due process. This is in the courts right now. The courts will eventually make their decision and then the state of Maine will let us know as public schools how we should proceed. It's
015very simple. This is how our government works. Okay? It's been working this way for a long time. And I don't understand why you would want to preempt or somehow get around something and just let the process work itself out. Regardless of whether you personally agree with this for your political reasons or your religious reasons is irrelevant. When you come in here, you are a public oath servant. You are here to follow the law. >> Thank you, Miss Costa. >> And keep your personal opinions to yourself. That's that's all I want to say. Just follow the law and let this ride out. Please resend policy AC/DC. Len Wlette. Good evening. Thank you for allowing me an opportunity to speak. My name is Lynn Wlette. I'm a resident of Jay. Civil rights are personal rights that protect
016individuals and guarantee equal treatment and protection under the law. They are legal entitlements created by laws that ensure equal treatment and protection from discrimination. Civil rights legislation has outlawed discrimination based on specific classes, including race, color, ancestry, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity, physical or mental disability, religion, and age. I contend that the RSU73 school board has violated the civil rights of transgender students in RSU73 by disallowing use of bathroom and locker room facilities and participation on school sponsored teams that align with their gender identity. To change a law, you can propose a new bill through a legislature, support an existing bill, start an initiative or referendum, or gather signatures for a referendum. The processes that establish laws are complex, yet they must be utilized to establish, to change, or repeal laws. This
017is a preferable approach over attempting to change laws by decree or by violation. If you believe that change is necessary, choose a legal process. Rescend the ACDC policy changes and look at the issue again. Follow the law. >> Steve Bian, president of J. I'm uh speaking for the recision of this ACDC policy. Tonight, I want to address something that should be at the core of every school board member's work. that is making responsible decisions that meet the needs of our students while respecting what this community can realistically afford. Several board members who voted for the policy now at the center of this lawsuit campaigned on preventing waste, controlling spending, and protecting taxpayers. That was your message. That was your brand. And yet here we are watching those same individuals support a completely unnecessary and legally
018unsound policy that has now put our district squarely in the path of a lawsuit that will almost certainly we will lose. You cannot run on fiscal responsibility and then push policies that invite expensive litigation. You cannot say you're here to protect students and taxpayers while endorsing actions that siphon money away from classrooms into lawyers pockets. This is not complicated. It is cause and effect. If you knowingly pass a policy that violates state law, you will get sued. And when you get sued, the district will spend money. And money that is money that will not be spent on students. Right now, we have students who need academic support, safe facilities, updated materials, qualified staff, and mental health resources. We have families facing housing instability and food insecurity. These are real unmet needs. And instead of investing
019our limited resources into meeting those needs, we are preparing to pour money into defending a policy that your own legal counsel clearly and repeatedly warned was indefensible. That is not responsible governance. That is not fiscal stewardship and that is not why the community elected you. We don't expect perfection, but we do expect accountability when you knowingly pass a policy that jeopardizes our budget and therefore our students well-being because it aligns with a personal or political preference rather than sound legal or financial judgment. That is not leadership. That is negligence. And let me be clear, this community will not support leaders who put political posturing over student welfare or who create expensive problems and then expect taxpayers to foot the bill. What we will support are schoolboard members who remember why they are here. To support
020students, not lawsuits, to fund education, not litigation. To make responsible decisions, not reckless ones. If certain board members cannot or will not put students needs first, then the community is prepared to support candidates who will. Our students deserve better. Our taxpayers deserve better. And our district deserves leaders who take their responsibilities seriously. Thanks, >> Linda Dean. Good evening. My name is Linda Dean from Liverour. The main Human Rights Commission did not sue RSU73 for by accident or for bullying. They sued because this board adopted a policy that violates Maine civil rights law. This is not a political disagreement. It's a civil rights violation and the commission is required to act when a district discriminates. Tonight's agenda makes something very clear. You must decide whether to resend this policy and whether to hire new legal counsel.
021The only reason that question is before you is because your current legal counsel refused to bless an unlawful policy. They w warned it conflicted with main law and advised you to wait for the courts. You ignored that advice. That decision didn't just break the law. It broke your own board ethics policy, which requires acting in students best interests, following legal guidance, and avoiding foreseeable harm. You also took an oath to uphold Maine law, not the beliefs of outside groups, not national talking points, and not a federal executive order, which is not a law and cannot override the Maine Human Rights Act. Yet, this board adopted policy ADC DC based on the executive order and treated main civil rights protections as optional. That was never permissible. And it is exactly why we're being sued. And it
022here is the most important question. Who will pay the bill for this? Not the out ofstate groups who wrote the policy. Not pre whose talking points were read into the record. Not the organizations that claim their language would keep you out of trouble. The taxpayers of Jay, Livemore, and Livemore Falls will pay. Our community will pay and our students will pay. The main human rights commission has already said the lawsuit will be dropped if this board rescends a policy. Every day you refuse, the financial cost grows and the burden on this district gets heavier. You can end this tonight. resend the policy. Honor the oath you took. Follow your ethical and legal obligations. Stop putting this district at legal and financial risk. And most importantly, do what every student at Spruce Mountain deserves. Create a
023school where they can learn, belong, and become their best selves. Thank you. I'm looking for a motion to either resend or leave in place policy ACDC, coordination of federal and state law. Do I have a motion? [clears throat] discussion. >> I'm sorry. I I couldn't hear what he said. If it was resend or accept I couldn't hear. It wasn't in the mic. >> The motion on the table is to leave AC/DC in place. Discussion. Elaine. Thank you. You know how I feel on this. I'm against breaking the law. We've done that. Some people have gone against their oath of office. I'd like to know uh from you Sher whether what where we stand right now in terms of legal expenditure regarding board expenses to this date. I know we have to be way above our
024average. I don't have the exact figure, but I think it's around $35,000 that we spent so far. This should >> $35,000 if you didn't hear that. >> But that's not necessarily for this issue. That's what that's what we >> I'm asking related to school board issues. >> Schoolboard issues. Yes. >> Yeah. Probably about 35,000. Not related to necessarily AC/DC. >> Right. Okay. But I mean that is investigations and all kinds of other things that we've undergone. I know that this money is coming out of our students school budget, the one we work on very hard each year to provide for our students, for our facilities, for our maintenance, for things that need to be done, for their education, for the professionals we hire, for the buses we keep on the road, the bus drivers, the
025edte. This keeping of this policy as it's written puts us at great legal risk. More importantly, for every taxpayer in the three towns, it puts them at risk. Our tax dollars go to all of this legal advice. >> Actually, there are people, >> if I can just speak. >> No, when I'm done, you can. I was just gonna >> tell you about the cost. >> Uh well, I guess you'll have to say that when I'm done. >> Um right now our budget is funded by these three towns. Putting that number at risk when many of you have made it public, whether you were on the board or not, that you think our budget's too high and you want to cut it. Um, I find that just ridiculous and I really don't if we are being
026funded by, and you'll explain that, Sherry, I'm sure. Um, if this legal action is being funded by an outside group, wow, I question that as well. We are ruling for our district and the money and the taxpayers within it. I don't see an outside group being being uh proper as funding anything for us that we are responsible for. We are responsible for this and our taxpayers. We don't need outside money. All we have to do is follow the law and keeping AC/DC as it is written now and not choosing to revert to our prior policy which was within the limits of the law and letting the federal courts fight this as you're well aware of as was advised legally is just wasteful and knowingly illegal. I totally disagree with this motion, with this policy, and
027we've heard overwhelmingly from public comments that the majority in our community, in our community. Uh we have heard publicly tonight that they're not in favor of this. So, I urge you to vote no. I know some of you won't, but I'm going to stick with my oath of office, stand for State of Maine law, and I will not vote in favor of this. So, Title Nine is is a federal law that was put in place in 1972, which is the law that we're going by. We do have a grant that is being offered our lawyers to help fund this suit. By whom? The Alliance Defending Freedom, which is funded by whom? >> It's It's a federal group. >> Yeah. And who are they funded by? >> Why Why does that matter? >> I'd like to
028know where the money is coming from. Is it coming from this community? Is it coming from our state? >> They could be. It could be because anybody couldn't I have contributed to the alliance defending freedom. So >> I'm sure you have it. >> Oh, you weren't recognized. You were not recognized by the chair. Does anybody else have any comments before we vote? >> Maybe. >> Um, sorry. Having difficulty here. Um, based on the information that you just said, I just have um a couple quick questions if that's okay. Um, to make sure that we have all of the information when making a vote. Um, you said that we're being offered a grant to cover all of the legal expenses that you know will happen if we continue with this. Does that cover all eight of
029the schools? Um, currently only four that are. And if so, when were you given this information? Was this right before the meeting or were we left out of it for any particular reason? I got the information this morning uh that there was the funding was going to be made available. It is being made available to all of the districts that are currently being sued. Um um the money is being made available so it's not guaranteed if they get back they can still back out. We haven't signed up. We haven't said yes we're definitely doing this. So basically, we're being paid to vote to keep it. That's what the grant means. Because if we do not accept the grant, that's fine. If >> the grant doesn't go through us. So our attorneys, if we decide to
030go with a certain set of attorneys, will apply for a grant. >> If we apply for a specific attorney, so did they pick the attorney? >> Okay. So, if the attorney that we're seeing tonight isn't qualifying for the grant, doesn't that put us at more financial risk? I'm just trying to understand, Sherry. I'm not trying to like get to got you or anything. I just want to understand. >> I had a Zoom call with the other districts that are involved in the lawsuit and we talked about possible attorneys um whether the other districts were going to fight, whether they weren't going to fight. And so the attorney that we are going to be talking about a little bit later um is that attorney that uh we spoke with last he well you weren't on the
031board then but uh Mr. Bzachi of C Smith trial lawyers. So, can can you can you um tell me if I'm misunderstanding? So, we So, there are attorneys that are going to apply for a grant if we go with them. Okay. So, so are they applying on behalf of the school? they they'll be applying on behalf of all of the schools if any of the schools decide to go with this attorney or any attorney can apply for this grant. >> Okay. So, so would so not so what does does that amount does the amount need does that need to be accepted by being their client? Are we entitled to that money or does that need to come to the board for approval as an independent? Like does that money because we're accepting it because we
032are a public organization because we are accepting funds on behalf of a public organization. Does that I know there's a certain threshold probably and I'm sure it's very much uh that they're applying for. Does that need to come to us as a board because we're a separate entity? We are we are a client of them but we are not we we need to still accept the funds as a public entity. >> Yes. >> That I don't know where the money is not going directly through us Mason. I'm not sure but I will check with uh the attorney. >> Thank you. First of all, it's not my intention to end up on the 8:00 or 9:00 10:00 news tonight, but I we've been publicly challenged to defend positions and I've remained silent up until this point
033in time. I'm torn emotionally, legally, financially on the direction this policy could take us. I've lived with Title N over 50 years. And I've seen what it has done to emancipate women and to provide the spaces for them so they can perform whether it's a fraternal organization or civic organization or open up themselves to fair competition. From where I'm standing, this policy wants us to protect girls by keeping girls sports for girls. We've seen the Olympics. We've seen men's divisions and women's divisions. And the men's competition compares nothing to the women's competition. And most women will say that they cannot compete against a man. A transgender person who identifies as a woman is still >> putting the girls in an awkward position. And who's defending the girls position where they have to accept competition against
034women who aren't women. That's what I get to say I wish I had better words to express things, but I think women's sports should be for women and I hear the public comments here. I understand your positions and I know they're deeply held, but I've seen positions of people in the community that don't support that the position and do support the position of girls sports for girls. Thank you. We have a motion on the table to not resend AC/DC. >> Can I get a roll call, Lara? >> Absolutely. >> Thank you. Um, I'd like to follow up on what Mason said. Do we have to vote as a board to accept this outside funding for this legal services? Where do we stand legally on that? any funding that we get. I I look at Scott
035and he says he has no idea. Um I would think we would have to vote as a board to accept outside any outside funding of our legal >> services. >> Okay. So we we will take a vote on that. >> Uh is that funding guaranteed? I know you said that the lawyers will apply for it. That doesn't sound guaranteed. Is it guaranteed once they apply for it? >> Well, nothing nothing in life is guaranteed. But um in in addition to that, the main education initiative is also setting up a school board defense fund. So I'm 98% sure that funding will be available. Is there any other information about outside sources that are funding this movement that we should know about? You seem to be informed. Perhaps we all need to be informed. >> Now, thank
036you. [snorts] >> I know I sound like a broken record today. um because it's a grant. Most grants um have a stipulated amount. When that amount is maxed out because lawyers are very expensive as we all know, then it goes back to the taxpayers or do we keep applying for the grants over and over and over again and hope that the funding is available. 98% leaves 2% chance that the taxpayers who have kids that can't afford sneakers and we had a fundraiser for it who we have schools asking for snow clothes right now. We have a heater that needs repairing in the primary. There is so much more we could be doing for our students and this is what we're doing. We're gambling because we can't guarantee anything. Is if the grant is maxed out,
037we don't even know what the lawyer's hourly weights are. We don't know anything of that. So instead of focusing on that, instead of focusing on the cafeteria where food is becoming harder to get by because of new regulations, this is the grant that we're pursuing right now instead of waiting. There are other schools pursuing this already. Why are we being the guinea pig? Let them do it. We can't afford it. We cannot afford this risk. If a school board, if a school district runs in the red, by law, they must close. We all know this. Are we willing to risk that? I'm not. There are too many kids counting on us in this area. And this is what we're going to do. We're going to risk that because if we lose and we keep trying
038to fight it over and over and over again, I guarantee you we're going to go in the red. And if that happens, the school closes. That is the law. If a school goes into the red, it is forced to close. I'm not willing to risk our school closing. I make no apologies for my previous votes and uh stance on this issue. As an equal taxpayer of Livermore Falls and to the RSU73 community, I do not apologize. I fully support and believe in the importance of this issue. As a parent of students who currently attend this district, I do not apologize for my vote. I do not apologize for believing in the protection and safety and dignity of each and every child's well-being. Furthermore, for those who voted for me to be a voice for the
039community, they know what I stand on. There are many behind me who believe that this issue is important and they want the safety and dignity of their children to be protected as outlined by policy ACDC. My vote stands. Okay, Laura, go ahead with a roll call. >> Yes. >> No. Please. No. Please. No. >> Yes. Daniel, >> no. >> Yes. >> Sarah, >> no. >> I'm not breaking my oath of office and breaking the laws of the state of Maine. No. >> Yes. and >> yes, >> motion carries. Do our student representatives get a vote? >> Okay, I'll consider a motion to hire Steve Smith Trial Lawyers as our representative for the human rights Commission lawsuit >> discussion. >> Don Don Stout >> Sarah. >> Yes. Um I was at the earlier meeting with this
040law firm and they do not have a background in education and it feels like at this critical moment we need a law firm with a background in education. Any other discussion? >> Laura, can I get a roll call? >> Yes. >> No. >> Sarah, >> no. Yes. >> Yes. >> Abstain. >> Danielle >> abstain. >> Yes. >> Andrew. >> Yes. >> Motion carries. I'll accept a motion to enter into executive session. to get legal advice regarding the Human Rights Commission lawsuit. >> All those in favor? >> All those opposed. this uh law firm that we just agreed to hire. Um we were given the name and that's pretty much it. Are is there any credentials that the public should be aware of that is why we felt so strongly to hire them? As as Scott
041said, we're the motion was to go into executive session, not about the attorney. We already voted on the attorney. So to discuss the attorney, though, >> no, we're going to meet with the attorney. >> Okay. Didn't ask my question though. You weren't on the board the last time, >> but as a board member, shouldn't I have been informed of their credentials? Because you just said that this rampant was to cover and you just found out this morning. I was on the board this morning. Good. >> He's refusing to Laura, put us back at 7:55, please. I'll accept a motion to adjurnn. >> All those in favor. >> Thank you everyone.