Brittany Berg

EDEC 435
Danneberg
7 May 2014
Date Initiated: March 2014

Leadership/ Advocacy Plan

Advocacy Group or Individual:

Brittany Berg

I am raising my voice to speak out for the children on behalf of their right to privacy. I am
advocating for every childs right to privacy while using the restroom. Constituents believe that students,
especially in the upper grades, will take advantage of the same sex bathrooms and the staff will have no
authority to stop them. Other constituents believe that the state is going too far by allowing oppositesex
students to use restrooms and locker rooms. The scenario that they raise is of a self conscious girl with
physical insecurities of her body having to change in front of an early maturing male due to teachers not
possessing the ability to monitor who enters the bathrooms or locker rooms; that [the] privilege [of samesex restrooms]could be abused by youthful sex offenders. Overall, the K-12 transgender-rights bill is to help
prevent schools and teachers from discriminating against transgender students, but what about the overall
safety of our students?
Legislators are trying to pass laws that accommodate all students, which includes transgender
students; but, I believe that allowing both males and females to enter the same bathroom opens up a another
set of problems. My primary concern is that schools will not have enough support, both financially and
physically, to monitor the restrooms. Can a school monitor mischievous boys that are able to freely enter the
womens bathroom? School districts have enough problems to worry about, the Senate should not add to their
list of To Dos by allowing more room for childrens mischief, including bullying, within their schools.
This law allows K-12 students to enter the bathroom, what of staff members? of guests? What
prevents a six year old from being harassed in the bathroom by a sex offender? Parents, school
administrators and school board members would have no say over students who identify themselves as
transgender and enter shower rooms or bathrooms used by the opposite sex. There are too many variables in
this law for it to be passed into law without adaptations that take these variables into account. The K-12
transgender- rights bill has sparked a passionate debate on the Senate floor about when a transgender
students right to expression conflicts with another students discomfort and right to privacy. Passing the law
that allows transgender students to use the public restroom of their choice was a good idea, but looking at the
consequences the school, parents, teachers and other students will have to face is a step back instead of a step
forward. One solution could be adding a bathroom; labeling one bathroom for females, one for males and a
third for student who feel uncomfortable labeling themselves unisex, a one-stall-only bathroom. This will
allow students who want privacy to obtain privacy in the bathroom and also allow transgender students to feel
comfortable and safe using the third bathroom for both males and females.

Statement of Problem:
Problems seen with bill AB1266 are that the bill creates more prevalent opportunities for sexual
activity and/or harassment at schools; this bill interferes with the protection and safety of the younger

generation (male, female, and other) from sex offenders who would be allowed to use the restrooms; and this
bill compromises an individuals privacy by introducing the possibility of cameras in the restroom.
Background information (history):
The bill AB1266 states that both male and female students will have equal access to the bathroom that
fits their sexual orientation. California lawmakers passed the K-12 transgender-rights bill, which would
require that public K-12 schools let transgender students choose which restrooms they use and which school
teams they join based on their gender identity. This bill was previously passed by the Assembly, Senate, and
governor and is currently being implemented in schools. Overall, the state is stripping away a childs right to
privacy, this boundary is necessary within society.
California lawmakers passed the K-12 transgender-rights bill. The Senate gathered in California on
Wednesday, July 3rd, 2013 in Sacramento to introduce the bill and approved AB1266 by a 21-9 vote.
Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, a Democrat from San Francisco, initiated the bill that would require that
public K-12 schools let transgender students choose which restrooms they use and which school teams they
join based on their gender identity. The Governor passed the bill into law as of January 1, 2014.
There are concerns regarding the wording of the bill. Parents, school administrators and school
board members would have no say over students who identify themselves as transgender and enter shower
rooms or bathrooms used by the opposite sex. People against this bill are afraid of the situations the schools
will be putting the students in. Some believe that students especially in the upper grades will take advantage
of the situation and the staff will have no authority over the issues. Others believe that the state is going too
far by allowing oppositesex students to use the restrooms and locker rooms. The scenario that they raise is of
a self conscious girl with physical insecurities of her body having to change in front of an early maturing male
due to teachers not possessing the ability to monitor who enters the bathrooms or locker rooms; raising the
issue that the privilege could be abused by youthful sex offenders. Overall, the K-12 transgender-rights bill
is to help prevent schools and teachers from discrimination against transgender students but compromises the
safety of the student body as a whole until such a time that the bill provides for the situations outlined above.

Timeline of Bill 1266:

1/1/2014

Bill Effective

08/12/13

Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 85, Statutes of 2013.

08/12/13

Approved by the Governor.

08/01/13

Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 4:45 p.m.

07/03/13

In Assembly. Ordered to Engrossing and Enrolling.

07/03/13

Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 21. Noes 9. Page 1654.).

06/13/13

Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

06/12/13

From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 5. Noes 2.) (June 12).

05/23/13

Referred to Com. on ED.

05/09/13

In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.

05/09/13

Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 46. Noes 25. Page 1321.)

04/29/13

Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

04/25/13

Read second time and amended. Ordered to second reading.

04/24/13

From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 5. Noes 2.) (April 17).

03/11/13

Referred to Com. on ED.

02/25/13

Read first time.

02/24/13

From printer. May be heard in committee March 26.

02/22/13

Introduced. To print.

Objective:
Developing and implementing a Safe place for children to feel comfortable; I am advocating for the
right and privacy for students on the receiving end of the bill AB1266. Advocacy for my issue, I chose three
out of the six contexts for advocacy in early childhood; advocating for the individual, programbased
advocacy and political activism. Advocacy for an individual child and/or family, advocating for the
individuals right to privacy, brings up the issue of the individuals privacy, that its not right to pressure
children to use the restroom in front of the opposite sex; for some students, using the restroom in the presence
of the opposite sex is embarrassing and even humiliating, prompting the question: how can these children be
protected? Programbased advocacy can be seen if directors and teachers work together in order to expose the
issue to the public at large by informing the parents of the students and then the community of the
consequences that will occur if the law is passed, let the public see the problems with this issue. By informing

and influencing the parents of the students and branching out to inform the community we may prevent this
step backwards in personal rights. Political activism is shown by directors banding together and discussing the
issue at the state and federal level; getting their voices heard in the senate and assembly so that the governor
will take a more in depth look at the bill. This will allow more time for us to state the issues with passing the
bill.
Barriers and Challenges:
-Supporters of transgender students rights
-Supporters/ allies for the LGBT group
-Implementation of the law in public schools
-Section 221.5 (f) A pupil shall be permitted to participate in sex-segregated school programs and activities,
including athletic teams and competitions, and use facilities consistent with his or her gender identity,
irrespective of the gender listed on the pupils records.

Stakeholders and their perspectives:

The stakeholders for this issue primarily consist of the parents, students, administrators and teachers
who will be subjected to the new law. Advocates for children include state senators and assembly members,
their side on the issue.
Assembly Floor: Voted on 05/09/13
Ayes: Alejo, Ammiano, Atkins, Bloom, Blumenfield, Bocanegra, Bonilla, Bonta, Bradford, Buchanan, Ian
Calderon, Campos, Chau, Chesbro, Dickinson, Eggman, Fong, Frazier, Garcia, Gatto, Gomez, Gordon, Hall,
Roger Hernndez, Jones-Sawyer, Levine, Lowenthal, Medina, Mitchell, Mullin, Muratsuchi, Nazarian, Pan,
Perea, V. Manuel Prez, Quirk, Quirk-Silva, Rendon, Skinner, Stone, Ting, Weber, Wieckowski, Williams,
Yamada, John A. Prez
Noes: Achadjian, Allen, Bigelow, Brown, Chvez, Conway, Dahle, Donnelly, Beth Gaines, Gorell, Grove,
Hagman, Harkey, Jones, Linder, Maienschein, Mansoor, Melendez, Morrell, Nestande, Olsen, Patterson,
Salas, Wagner, Wilk
Senate Floor: Voted on 07/03/13
For: Beall, Block, Calderon, Corbett, De Len, DeSaulnier, Evans, Galgiani, Hancock, Hernandez, Hill,
Hueso, Jackson, Lara, Leno, Liu, Monning, Padilla, Steinberg, Wolk, Yee
Against: Anderson, Berryhill, Fuller, Gaines, Huff, Knight, Nielsen, Walters, Wyland
Constituents, Allies, Opponents:
Constituents: Students, teachers and parents
Allies: Transgender students and their families who want equality within the school as well as people
associated with/allies of the cap 8.Other groups and network include: Equality California, Gender

Spectrum, GSA Network, National Center for Lesbian Rights, Transgender Law Center.

Opponents: A large percentage of younger children, their families, and teachers who are not allowed to
monitor the bathrooms. Parents of young children (mostly mothers of young females) who will be impacted
the most by this decision. A coalition called Privacy for all Students has been trying to put a referendum on
the law on the 2014 ballot.
Long term goal:
-To keep same sex restrooms, locker rooms, and sport teams in schools by attending school board meetings
and meeting with Senator.
-Networking with the junior college at Diablo Valley College and the Early Childhood Education program
and joining together to explain the issues and educate students and parents about the consequences our young
children will have to face through parent meetings and passing out flyers at the childrens center.
-Collecting signatures to have the bill re-voted on in hopes of changing the law
Short term goals:
-Write a letter to state legislators, namely Assemblymember Susan Bonilla or Senator Mark DeSaulnier. I
chose to write to these members because they are advocators for children in my area.
- Create a flyer to educate the public on what will be implemented in the public and charter school systems.
The flyer offers people an opportunity to understand the key issues and to help support by either signing the
petition online to bring the bill to the 2014 ballot or by writing their own letter of concern to the school board.
-Write a letter to the editor of the Simpson Slate newspaper.
-Use social media to advocate for the children, informing parents on what to expect in change of the coming
year.
-Meet March 29th to talk with a Senator or Assembly member.
Networks and Coalitions: National Association for the Education of Young Children, Parent- Teacher
Association, District officials, and teachers. A coalition called Privacy for all Students has been trying to put a
referendum on the law on the 2014 ballot.
Networks for this bill: Equality California, Gender Spectrum, GSA Network, National Center for

Lesbian Rights, Transgender Law Center.

Tactics used for each goal accomplishment and documentation
-Educational Tactics:
-Report to parents on the issues that will arise and how to deal with them.
-Create a safe zone for children who need it.
-Persuasive Tactics
-Collecting signatures to have the bill re-voted on in hopes of changing the law.
-Meet with legislators to discuss key issues.
-Mobilization Tactics:

-Form an advocacy group.

-Have the parents be supporters to speak out and voice their worries and opinions.

References
Leginfo. "AB-1266 Pupil Rights: Sex-segregated School Programs and Activities."California Legislative
Information. California Legislature, n.d. Web.
<http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml>.
-http://openstates.org/ca/bills/20132014/AB1266/
-http://transgenderlawcenter.org/archives/9647
-http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/feb/24/petition-drive-put-transgender-law-californiavote/?page=all