Kalispell Public Schools is looking to cover all its bases before changing its nondiscrimination policy to include transgender students or students identifying themselves as having nontraditional gender identities.

A special subcommittee met Wednesday to consider policy changes.

The subcommittee of board members and administrators is led by Jack Fallon, a school board trustee and member of the district’s policy committee. Fallon said it will likely take at least three meetings over the next three to six months before a conclusion is reached.

“We need to find out more information about it — what the law is and what issues are here locally,” Fallon said.

Current school policy required by law outlines that the district will provide equal educational opportunities and activities to all students regardless of things such as race, color, sex, religious belief and disability, among others.

The subcommittee is tasked with deciding whether or not to add gender identity and sexual orientation to that list.

The Montana High School Association raised interest about gender issues earlier this year when it proposed a controversial amendment that would have allowed transgender student-athletes to compete in activities of the gender with which they identified.

Due to lack of support in subcommittee meetings, that proposal was withdrawn before the association’s annual meeting in January.

What the Kalispell subcommittee members learned Wednesday is that they might need to tackle procedures rather than policy and what, if any, facility accommodations might be required.

The additional gender identity language is basically an enumeration of the word “sex,” according to Fallon.

“I don’t know really if we have really a policy issue or a procedures issue because a lot of this almost sounds like it has to do with what the three-letter word s-e-x means. It’s been expanded to mean more than male or female,” Fallon said. “I don’t know how much it is as a policy change as opposed to as an understanding of that word and how we can apply that word to all the different people that are coming through the school district system.”

Fallon later added: “If we need to have all that other language in there, at what point in time will we have language that you can’t discriminate against obesity? Are we going to have all these other characteristics that add to race, color, creed, sex?”

Superintendent Mark Flatau also questioned if this issue would be best handled through procedure.

“At some point is this a necessity to change our current policy, or do we address it through a procedural piece? From my standpoint I think it can be addressed procedurally as to how we enforce this,” Flatau said. “We are going to ensure that all, all of our students have an equal educational opportunity without being discriminated against regardless of what ends up on a piece of paper, period. So I’m torn, I mean that’s my core belief — all means all — and we have a responsibility to provide that to all of our kids.”

Trustee Don Murray said federal law still stands against discrimination whether the language is added or not.

“We can’t discriminate. So the question becomes should we do this,” Murray said.

Subcommittee member and board trustee Steve Davis said current policy is adequate. He asked whether or not the specific gender-identity language would open up another set of issues.

Earlier in the meeting, subcommittee members had reviewed responses from the U.S. Department of Justice and the U.S. Department of Education to two California school districts regarding investigations on sex-based discrimination complaints of a middle-school transgender student in Arcadia, California, and a transgender elementary-school student in Downey, California.

The Arcadia case involved a student who was born female but identified as male. This case involved issues related to bathroom and locker-room access in addition to sex-specific overnight field-trip accommodations. The Downey case involved a student who was born male but identified as female and the school’s failure to promptly respond to complaints of harassment from other students.

In both cases, the California school districts reached agreements without admitting any violation of federal law.

“They’re not law by any means but the reason why they came into play was because of federal funding. That federal funding dictates Title IX. Federal funding may not dictate Title IV, but if you’re discriminating you could be taken to court regardless,” Fallon said. “They’re indicators of direction of how we may be needing to treat people. I’ll just keep it that simple.”

Discussion meandered into administrators’ responses in both cases.

According to Murray, “I’m already feeling like we’re focusing on how to accommodate a certain type of student when I thought the question for this group was are we going to include in our nondiscrimination policy the following three categories: sexual identity, sexual orientation or failure to conform to stereotypical notions of masculinity or femininity.”

The subcommittee will continue its discussions at 4 p.m. April 28 in the Kalispell Middle School Library.

Reporter Hilary Matheson may be reached at 758-4431 or by email at hmatheson@dailyinterlake.com.