The Porterville City Council will continue working on two ordinances that have sparked significant outcry: a new “Parental Rights in Education” ordinance, and a “Protect Women’s Safe Spaces” transgender bathroom ordinance previously discussed on March 4.
Mayor Greg Meister directed city staff at the council’s March 18 meeting to craft both proposals into ordinances that would allow citizens to sue government agencies for violations with potential loans provided by the city for citizens’ legal costs.
The published text of the proposed “Parental Rights in Education” ordinance would require public schools in Porterville to notify parents if their children are requesting access to private facilities for another gender or asking to be referred to by a different name or pronouns.
The ordinance also reinforces existing mandated reporter laws, requires schools to provide more time for parents to review sexual education materials, and prohibits contraceptive distribution at schools.
Under the proposed text, parents would be granted standing to sue schools that violate the regulations. A city “Legal Assistance Fund” would provide funding for attorney, court filing, and expert witness fees.
During the meeting, Mayor Greg Meister stated that legal funds would likely be distributed through loans.
“What we do have the ability to do is have a civil right of action, and some form of maybe a payback plan,” Meister said, “where someone could come to us, in private, and set up some form of system where we protect the civil rights of our constituents here in Porterville.”
Prior to the meeting, the Valley Voice reached out to the Porterville Unified School District for comment on the potential city ordinance, and to find out what policies it has in place today for transgender students.
A district representative stated that the district currently follows “all applicable federal and state laws.”
“Porterville Unified School District has always been committed to following all applicable federal and state laws that govern public education in California. Our policies and practices are designed to comply with federal regulations, the California Education Code, and other relevant state requirements while prioritizing the safety, well-being, and educational needs of all students,” a statement from the district read.
“Our focus remains, as always, on our core mission of providing quality education in a supportive environment where students can thrive, maintaining appropriate communication with families, and operating our schools in accordance with federal and state law.“
Council tackles Parental Rights ordinance
Many opponents of the ordinance accused the council of pursuing the “Parental Rights in Education” ordinance with a bias against transgender youth.
Multiple council members chafed at the idea that the parental rights ordinance targeted transgender youth specifically, though the first item of the ordinance specifically called for “Parental Notification for Gender Identity Changes.”
“When you allow a child to go and change their records at the school without their parental permission, that usurps the parental rights,” Vice Mayor Ed McKervey, who proposed the ordinance, said. “And it’s not exactly all this gender ideology everybody’s saying. This is about parental rights. That’s what it says in there.”
Council members Raymond Beltran and AJ Rivas agreed.
“This isn’t necessarily trying to pick out one classification of individual, it’s more giving rights back to the parent,” Beltran said. “In society over the last 30 years, parents are allowing the government to raise their children: feed three meals a day, daycare, sex education, the government is becoming the parent.”
“We don’t have – or I don’t – have any issues with anybody or what they reclassify themselves as, because I have family members that are like that,” Rivas said. “And I’ve dealt with them. So, I know exactly what they’ve gone through, and I hear what the opponents [of the proposition] are saying. All it is is nothing but fear-mongering.”
McKervey said that it would take time before the council could implement the parental rights ordinance due to ongoing legal cases, but that he was intent on seeing it implemented.
“Now, this thing may not be able to go forward in its current form, but it’s going to go forward in some form, I’ll guarantee you that. We’re gonna find a way to put this through,” he said.
Beltran stated that he recommended tabling the ordinance, but continuing work on it in the background, due to the ongoing legal cases.
Meister said that he didn’t want to table the ordinance – as it would sit in stasis until brought back to the council – resulting in his direction to city staff to continue the development of both the “Parental Rights” and “Women’s Safe Spaces” ordinances.
“Silence is acceptance. We can no longer be silent on these issues. We have to start standing up, and to municipalities across this state, I challenge you to take this stand,” Meister said. “If we continue to comply, we will comply ourselves into tyranny. It’s that simple.”
School system grievances
McKervey and Meister both had pointed words for the public school system.
McKervey said that AB 1955 – a state law that prohibits schools from requiring employees to inform any person, including a parent, about a child’s sexual orientation or gender identity – was government overreach into schools, and effectively treated children as adults.
“You need to consider taking your kids out of school. You need to consider homeschool. You need to consider other alternatives, because they have the power right now, and they’re winning,” he said. “And unless you change that, you may have to change where you send your kids to school.”
“‘Public schools’ is a farce. We no longer have public schools, they are state-ran schools,” Meister said.
“The administrators and teachers in our community are great people, we greatly respect them, but unfortunately they are caught in a bad position between parents and a student that may be going through hard issues,” Meister said, ”and this is a time for a parent to be a parent and help their child in a hard situation.”
Meister said that “whistleblower teachers” he said had reached out to him, and pointed to “curriculum for sex ed, for 13 year olds,” which he stated included instructions for various types of sex and masturbation.
“The teachers are frightened to have to teach this,” he said.
Public comment against the ordinance
LGBTQ advocates showed up in force to the March 18th’s meeting. Many were familiar faces who spoke about the transgender bathroom ordinance on March 4.
Dr Kathryn Hall, a retired pediatrician who lives in Lindsay, told the council the parental rights ordinance was misguided.
“When schools respect students’ privacy by not outing them about their consent, it does not harm anyone. Parents who feel a need to know their children’s gender identity can ask their child, but it is reasonable to wait until the child is feeling ready to tell them,” Hall said.
“Conversion therapy is ineffective, harmful, unethical, and illegal in many areas. No one should be subjected to it. Please protect all Porterville youth, all Porterville LGBTQIA+ adults, and all Porterville women, cisgender or transgender, by not instituting transphobic bathroom bans or supporting outing students against their will,” she added.
Matthew Aquino, a Porterville high school teacher, said that he would not comply if the council passed the ordinance – and that he would not be the only one. He encouraged the council to reconsider their views.
“Not only does this ordinance endanger children to physical abuse at home, it is also completely pointless. Do you know why? Because my colleagues and I will never comply with this ordinance,” he said. “We will resist your authoritarian overreach and your anti-human agenda, and you won’t be able to do anything about it, because at the end of the day, you have lies, insecurity, and fear on your side – and we have truth, morality, and the principle of liberty on our side.”
Catherine Wilkinson, a 14-year-old student, told the council about a transgender friend she had met while at a medical facility following an attempt at suicide.
“The girl who I shared a room with, she was a trans woman. She killed herself recently, a couple a months ago. She ended her own life because her mom didn’t love her – didn’t love all of her,” she said. “I shared a room with her my entire stay there and she told me that – I just want to wear a dress and feel pretty, like all of the other girls at school. I just want to have friends.”
“She had to be taken away from her mother because of abuse that was happening, and she was sent back to her mother to continue to be abused. She was outed without her own free will, and she ended her own life,” she said.
Public comment for the ordinance
While many LGBTQ advocates spoke against the ordinance, some spoke during public comment at the beginning and end of the meeting in support of the ordinance.
Rick Sullins, a Porterville resident, said he didn’t want his grandchildren using restrooms with the opposite gender.
“This is why we voted for you guys. A male is a male, female is a female, I don’t know what the solution for the rest of them are, but I appreciate you protecting my granddaughters,” he said. “I appreciate you protecting my grandsons, and not confusing them.”
Chris Rutledge, a Porterville resident, said that he didn’t initially plan on speaking, but wanted to support the council. He said that he didn’t want his 17 year old son learning about sexuality at school.
“I believe that’s something he needs to make up his mind on his own. He doesn’t need to be taught that from anybody,” Rutledge said. “Whatever he chooses to be, he chooses to be, but he doesn’t need to see it or hear it from anybody else. I want to applaud you men for what you’ve done here.”
Both received applause from the assembled crowd.
Greg Shelton, a former Porterville City Council member, spoke at the public comment period at the end of the meeting, after the majority of the crowd dissipated.
“It’s refreshing to see some of the old timers trot out their well-worn tropes, and the sky is falling. I wonder where modesty made you become a bigot. I’ve spoken to women about the idea of men in their bathrooms, and every one of them I’ve spoken to wasn’t a fan of it,” he said.
Shelton said that, with the small number of transgender citizens, the opposition to the bathroom ordinance amounted to a ‘tyranny of the minority.’
“It just feels like it’s the fifteen minutes of fame – and they’re back, we’re gonna go with the oldies, and we’re gonna get our fifteen minutes of fame,” Shelton said. “I just think it’s silly. I think it’ll waste time. It’s just incredibly insensitive and intolerant of everybody else.”
Next steps
The council did not set a date to revisit the “Parental Rights” ordinance or the “Women’s Safe Spaces” ordinance.
The next regular Porterville City Council meeting will be held on April 1, 2025 at Porterville City Hall, 291 N. Main St, Porterville, CA 93257.
They’re simply following Orange Idiot’s example: speak nonsense, and ignore the law.
I had thought Porterville had made progress, but it’s clear that idea was very wrong. The anti-LGBT animus was clearly on display at this meeting, declarations to the contrary not withstanding.
The council has identified an easy, MAGA-popular “issue” they can pursue and use to appear important, but just like Orange Idiot, it’s a lot of noise that doesn’t accomplish anything except tearing down the society we all depend on.
The city should not be providing people with loans for civil cases. If individuals want to sue they can do it on their own dime. If the Porterville City Council wants a “Legal Assistance Fund” the money should come out of their own personal pockets. If they want to pass these ordinances fine. However, the Porterville City Council using the tax-payers money for civil cases is an abuse of power and an abuse of our tax dollars.