CHINO, Calif. — In July 2023, the traditionally quiet school board meetings at the Chino Valley Unified School District turned rowdy as people packed into the room voicing their opinion on the "parental notification policy" passed.
The policy required school staff to notify parents within three days if their student requested to change their name or pronouns, or access to facilities or sports programs that did not align with the gender on their birth certificates.
It immediately created outrage among many parents like Kristi Hirst, who has three children in the school district.
"If the people pushing these policies really cared about kids, we would be talking about it very differently," said Hirst.
Hirst, who grew up in Chino and was a public school teacher at the district for years, says the policy was a direct attack on transgender students.
The issue caught the attention of the California Attorney General Rob Bonta's office, which filed a lawsuit against the school district claiming the policy violated student’s civil and constitutional rights.
Just two months later, in October 2023, the judge blocked portions of the policy through a preliminary injunction. The order said the policy had violated the state's equal protection clause and discriminated against transgender students.
But not all parents were against the policy. Oscar Avila, parent of a district student, was disappointed to see the policy blocked.
"It is mind-boggling how they would try so hard just to prevent parents for just knowing everything about the kids, everything," said Avila.
He says the policy is meant to ensure parents are in the know over their children's life. But many who were against the policy argued students who are transgender should have a say over when they feel safe to tell their parents. Avila and many others disagree — and say the school has a responsibility to inform parents of any changes.
In March 2024, the board ultimately voted to remove the notification policy as a result of the judge's block through a preliminary injunction. The state attorney’s office claimed victory, putting out a statement that read in part;
"This ruling, consistent with our previously secured preliminary injunction, reaffirms this obligation by ensuring no child becomes a target again by blocking Chino Valley Unified from ever adopting another forced outing policy," said Bonta. "Let this decision send a clear message to other school districts that have passed or are contemplating similar policies: discriminatory policies will not be tolerated in our educational institutions. I urge all school districts to take note and ensure every student, including LGBTQ+ students, can enjoy their right to learn and thrive in a school environment that promotes safety, privacy and inclusivity."
In response, the ruling prompted the board to rewrite the policy. The new version does not mention gender, but still requires parents are notified of any official change to their student’s record.
This policy stands, which is why those in favor of the original language like Avila are also claiming victory.
"It’s the same outcome. The outcome is if a child wants to be considered or called by a different name or any kind of changes to their to the information, that gets flagged and the parents get notified," said Avila. "So that's what we wanted. You know, so whether the state saying that they won, it doesn't really matter to us. What matters is the parents have parental rights."
Hirst disagrees, saying the lawsuit was not only hurtful to students but also a waste of taxpayer money.
"He's ruled that parents can have access to the students records, and that's never been up for debate. That's always been a right that parents have had. So legally, the lawsuit didn’t change anything," said Hirst.
Additionally, as these policies were being adopted by various school districts across the state, Hirst's nonprofit Our Schools USA was working with legislators to pass a law banning parental-notification policies. That bill, called the SAFETY Act, was passed and went into effect on Jan. 1, 2025.
Although Avila disagrees with the SAFETY Act, he says he is content with the policy that the district has now landed on after the litigation.
"I'm happy with the outcome. You know, the fact that the state thinks they won, that's fine with me because I know that the policy that we have in Chino Unified stands," said Avila.
It brings an end to a costly legal battle that Hirst hopes doesn’t repeat.
"Looking forward where we're headed as a country, where we're likely facing a lot of cuts to education, I think this was reckless," Hirst said. "I am hopeful that moving forward, they can lead with compassion instead, and that's something that costs $0."
