Being an “old school” liberal, I had thought that the new ideology and its theories being taught in the schools — like Gender Identity — were just about respecting each other. Like most of our community, I tried to be inclusive by listening, learning, only asking a few questions using the new language, and keeping my opinions to myself.
I didn’t realize how much these new ideologies were affecting children and youth until 2017, when my daughter was in third grade.
She came home one day and asked if she was a boy.
Shocked and confused, I asked why she would think that. She told me that some of her peers thought she was a trans boy because she preferred to play with the boys and had a short haircut at the time. I found out that she wanted to play with the boys because the girls wanted to label themselves and others and talk about crushes. She just wanted to be a kid and play.
That became the first of many discussions explaining the difference between biological sex and stereotypes. Later, these conversations involved pressure she received from peers, and most recently adults, to self-label. She was even encouraged to become a trans boy to fit into her friend group better, which includes trans youth. By then, she knew herself better, but still wondered why they thought she was a boy.
From these discussions, I found out that many kids think that if you fit a gender stereotype then you are that gender, and that you can actually grow new genitals of that gender. Do kids who think this become teens who think they’re trans? I had more questions than answers.
This is when I started to pay full attention to what was going on in our community. I noticed children with no previous signs of gender dysphoria, but with a history of autism/neurodiversity, and/or trauma, become trans teens — some medically transitioning. They were all friends and some had multiple family members who were trans.
The adults they were close to seemed to ignore their comorbid issues and focused on supporting their trans identity instead. Why were they transitioning so fast? What would happen if they changed their minds? — a normal part of youth. None of this made any sense anymore.
I decided to do a deep dive into the origins of all of this and to see what has happened to other youth who transitioned years ago. I didn’t want to be part of something that may be hurting youth by remaining silent.
Detransitioners Raise Their Voices
Through researching all sides of this issue, I discovered the detransitioners: the growing number of former trans people who did change their minds, telling stories of regret and sometimes horror over their efforts to identify as the opposite sex. There are more than 53,000 detransitioners on Reddit alone, with more “coming out” every day.
“You lied and said transitioning would make my pain go away. You lied and said changing myself was the only treatment for my gender dysphoria. You lied and said the solution was changing my body when the problem was in my mind.
You treated my gender dysphoria as the root cause of my pain instead of a symptom of my underlying core issues. You treated me as a boy trapped in a girl’s body instead of a traumatized child dealing with the aftermath of sexual, physical, and emotional abuse. You focused on the girl who wanted to be a boy and neglected to see the girl who was starving herself, self-harming, living in flashbacks, and actively suicidal.”
One detransioned woman describes how her undiagnosed autism was misinterpreted as Gender Dysphoria, the “clinical diagnosis received by transgender people.”
Elizabeth Hawker describes “unwittingly dressing up my Autism in the more fashionable clothing of Gender Dysphoria.”
“After six years of identifying as a trans man as a teenager, I desisted (stopped identifying as trans) at the age of 21. Since reclaiming my womanhood, I have been thinking long and hard about what exactly happened in my 15-year-old brain that made me feel I would only be stable and fulfilled if I took testosterone, changed my name and pronouns and socially became a man. The conclusion I have come to is that thinking I was trans was completely inseparable from my autism.”
“She implores parents to reject the advice of gender experts and politicians and trust their guts—their parental instincts—in the face of an onslaught of ideologically driven misinformation that steers them and their children toward risky decisions they may end up mourning for the rest of their lives.
Don’t be blindsided like so many parents I know,” warns Grossman, “be proactive and get educated. Feel prepared and confident to discuss trans, nonbinary, or whatever your child brings to the dinner table.” Whether it’s the “trans is as common as red hair” claim, or the “I’m not your son, I’m your daughter” proclamation, or the “do you prefer a live son or a dead daughter” threat, says Grossman, no family is immune, and every parent must be prepared.”
Why am I so concerned and determined to share this information? My research uncovered the link between all these theories and the policies in place for years now in our schools that encourage labeling and division. This is why I WILL NOT stay silent any longer.
Here are three key policies in Port Townsend schools and how they affect families:
This is part of Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion (DEI) training and related to Critical Race Theory (CRT) through the concept of Intersectionality. “Equity” does not mean equality — instead it involves holding back the oppressors and boosting the oppressed.
DEI divides persons into identity groups based on whether they are the oppressed (aka victim) or they are the oppressor. Individuals are not important. The identity groups are divided by race, gender, and sexuality. Economic class is ignored.
Here’s an example of what this looks like in action:
At the PT Schools Equity Forum we were divided into the following groups: people of the global majority (oppressed), white parents of students of the global majority (oppressed allies), and white people (oppressors). We were not allowed to talk to persons from other groups to solve problems.
Social Emotional Learning (SEL) is supposed to create “a positive classroom climate” that “feels safe, respectful, welcoming, and supportive of student learning.” This “Equity-focused” practice assumes a child may have had a history of trauma and focuses on helping a child analyze their feelings. This can be in the form of frequent lessons exploring emotions and values or having students fill out questionnaires that ask questions like if they’re feeling depressed.
When The Benji Project visits a class to “teach proven mindfulness and self-compassion tools to young people,” along with meditation they also practice SEL — sometimes taking up more class time with SEL than academics. This is supposed to “create space for student voice and agency.”
However, when a student doesn’t find these practices helpful or doesn’t want to participate, they may be socially pressured by the adults to participate anyway. This is strange, since “student opinion … is considered a valuable part of the educational environment.”
An excellent resource on this subject is Bad Therapy: Why the Kids Aren’t Growing Up by Abigail Shrier. It talks about what I have seen in schools regarding SEL, how it impacts families, and how it, and related practices, increase anxiety and hurt kids’ mental health and development.
This policy involves the first step in Gender Affirming Care — social transition. Gender affirmation has been proven to be damaging to young children, unhelpful to teens, and it doesn’t prevent suicide. The latest report on Gender Affirming Care is the 2024 Cass Review, an independent evaluation of gender identity services for children and young people, led by Dr. Hilary Cass, a retired consultant paediatrician and the former president of the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health in the UK.
This thorough analysis found that insufficient evidence was available to assess whether social transition in childhood has positive or negative effects on mental health, and that there was weak evidence for efficacy in adolescence. It questioned the reliability of international guidelines and advised caution in approaching social transition.
In Port Townsend, if a student of any age wishes to change their gender identity publicly, they can do this without their parent/guardians knowledge or permission and the school staff will socially affirm them.
A student can declare that they are the opposite of their biological sex and use the bathroom and locker room of their stated gender. Although “any student — regardless of gender identity — who requests greater privacy should be given access to an alternative restroom,” that is not always available when they need one. I’m not sure how this works in locker rooms.
Children thirteen years and older can see a gender affirming therapist for consultations without parents knowledge or permission. This can be done/started at the Port Townsend High School health clinic and soon will be available at Blue Heron (middle) School’s new health clinic for grades 6-8. Gender Affirming medical treatments (hormones, surgeries) need parental permission. However, kids who run away from home can receive Gender Affirming Care while in foster care if their parents refuse to affirm their new gender and cooperate with their transition (it can be considered emotional abuse per WA law ESSB 5599).
Gender Identity (a part of Gender theory which is a part of Queer theory) is a strong focus in SEL and Equity lessons. Students can be socially pressured by the adults to state their pronouns. Many young children believe that they can actually change their biological sex. I have learned that this is a frequent conversation amongst kids at Salish Coast Elementary. They are getting biological sex mixed up with gender stereotypes.
When kids are the age likely to believe in Santa and are taught starting in pre-kindergarten — through social media, kids TV shows, some adults, and their peers — that they can pick their gender, the confusion we are seeing makes sense. It took me one thoughtful conversation to tell my kids the truth about Santa, but it took many conversations to explain that they can’t change their bodies from boy to girl (and vice versa). The actual facts about this theory are clearly summarized in the article The Ideological Subversion of Biology.
This is especially hard to explain to neurodiverse children, like my own, who already struggle with identity and fitting in. Trans youth are mostly neurodiverse. This is why Seattle Children’s Autism Center has a partnership with their Gender Clinic.
Is encouraging gender transition “education” or indoctrination?
After I learned about the theories behind these policies and their wider impacts, I decided to look closer at how these ideas spread through our Port Townsend community. I discovered that 2017, the year my daughter and I had our first talk, was an impactful year for Gender Affirming Care in Port Townsend. Some of the youth I have mentioned, along with trans activist adults in our community, had put on a “legislative theater” performance called “Queer Youth Survival Quest.” A feature story in YES!Magazine explained that the interactive technique the production used was designed “to make concrete policy changes around a community justice issue.”
I noticed that community leaders, including those from Jefferson Healthcare and the Port Townsend School District, were in attendance.
It was that school year that the Gender-Inclusive Schools Policy was first created. There are now more than 20 books at Salish Coast Elementary, 35 books at Blue Heron School, and 30 books at Port Townsend High School that encourage gender transition.
Jefferson Healthcare started Gender Affirming Care training in 2017 as well (see Jefferson Healthcare’s Trans Mission). Since that year, more and more local youth have “come out” identifying as being part of the trans umbrella community — perhaps dozens. I’m finding out that many more youths that I had known as kids are choosing this identity. How many will medicalize due to this activism?
All of the theories that these policies are based on are part of Social Justice Activism. This movement was started by elite intellectuals who wanted to apply Postmodernist principles to society. They started actively teaching these practices in colleges starting in the 2010s. This is still taught today to all students in college.
This utopian theoretical ideology encourages the deconstruction of all parts of society including the way we communicate (that’s why language is always changing now). It emphasizes group identities, celebrates victimhood, and ignores the fact that people are individuals. This ideology especially despises science and reason. When this is taught to kids, it can lead to confusion regarding facts, loss of self-worth, and other mental health problems.
My journey to this discovery started more than six years ago. Now I’m a mom trying to share the truth about what kids are being taught in our community. So far, besides talking to friends, I’ve been to the Port Townsend Schools Equity Forum, the PTA, and have written a couple of letters to the Port Townsend Leader. I’m heading to the School Board next.
School Policy 2340 states that “materials and activities should be sensitive to America’s pluralistic society and should educate rather than indoctrinate.” Is the intensive pressure in our schools which encourages gender transitioning a form of education? Or are the policies described above — along with the flood of reading materials in school libraries plus the prominent display of the Trans Pride flag in every classroom celebrating this ideology — indoctrinating our kids?
I believe this is indoctrination. Schools should teach facts and how to think — NOT what to think. Families can handle the rest.
What Happened at Multicare? – A whistleblower reveals troubling new details about a Washington hospital’s push for “gender-affirming care” (Seattle Children’s, where local kids are referred, practices the same way).
On the afternoon of Wednesday, June 12th, attorneys for Port Townsend resident Julie Jaman filed a lawsuit on her behalf.The Center for American Liberty (CAL) registered the official complaint and demand for a jury trial in the Western District Court of Washington.
As we reported in March, legal action was threatened if the City and the YMCA did not meet demands for redress of Jaman’s grievances, including reinstating her pool privileges. The YMCA balked until early May, then declined to settle. The City never responded at all. From the law firm’s official press release:
“The City and YMCA’s failure to respond to Julie’s requests highlights their disregard for public safety,” said Harmeet Dhillon, CEO and Founder of The Center for American Liberty. “By prioritizing political ideology over the protection of children, they have set a dangerous precedent. As we pursue legal action, we demand accountability and a renewed commitment to protecting women’s privacy and civil rights.”
“After witnessing a disturbing incident in the women’s dressing room and raising concerns, I’ve faced a relentless storm of attacks and falsehoods,” Julie Jaman said. “Despite my four decades of community involvement, I’m left with no choice but to seek justice through the courts.”
The Center for American Liberty summarizes the lawsuit thusly:
BANNED FOR LIFE.
When Julie Jaman saw a man in a women’s swimsuit assisting young girls undress in a pool locker room, she was startled and shocked. She believed she may be witnessing a crime in progress.
The Port Townsend City Pool — operated by the local YMCA — has a policy that allows men who identify as women to use women’s private spaces like bathrooms and locker rooms. But the YMCA didn’t publicize the policy or warn the women using these facilities that they could be sharing the space with a man at any moment.
In the locker room, Julie was understandably concerned by the situation playing out in front of her. She confronted the man and asked him to leave. Within moments of this conversation, YMCA staff began berating Julie for her comments.
Instead of addressing Julie’s concerns, the YMCA immediately subjected Julie to a series of escalating punishments:
• YMCA staff told Julie that her objection to having a man in the woman’s locker room was “discriminatory.”
• Because Julie’s comment was “discriminatory,” the YMCA banned her for life from all facilities run by that YMCA branch.
• When Julie objected and attempted to explain her side of the story, YMCA staff called the police on her.
What began as an attempt to protect two young girls from exposing themselves in front of an adult male ended with a call to the police—to investigate Julie, not the man in the locker room.
Sadly, this type of injustice has become a common occurrence in today’s society. It’s a direct result of prioritizing adherence to radical gender ideology over protecting our fundamental rights.
Object to a man in the women’s locker room? Banned. Draw attention to the dangers of the bathroom policy? Silenced.
That’s why Julie is fighting back.
The Center for American Liberty filed a lawsuit against the YMCA and the City of Port Townsend on Julie’s behalf, asking the court to force the City to lift Julie’s lifetime ban. The City of Port Townsend and the YMCA punished Julie because of the content of her speech—because she spoke out after seeing a man in the women’s locker room. Julie deserves justice for the violation of her First Amendment rights and the emotional distress she’s experienced because of this ordeal.
And in her own words…
The written record shows that City Manager John Mauro was not the least bit interested in hearing Jaman’s version of the episode. (See lawsuit Exhibits 8-29 here.) The rush to judgment was immediate and uncompromising, following the arc of ideological narratives one now expects to hear from city hall. Ends justifying the means, City Manager Mauro and advisors swiftly determined that the City was obligated to follow Washington State law alone, forsaking concerns — if they were considered at all — for pragmatic child protection and the U.S. Constitution. It is there — on the constitutional grounds — that this battle will be waged.
The introduction of the lawsuit follows:
1. The City of Port Townsend, Washington (the “City” or “Port Townsend”) has an indoor community swimming facility called the Mountain View Pool (the “Pool”). As with most community pools, residents of this small city use the Pool to recreate and connect with others. But at this pool, patrons must forfeit their First Amendment rights before being allowed in. This is unconstitutional.
2. The City outsources day-to-day management of the Pool to the Olympic Peninsula YMCA (the “YMCA”), a local affiliate of the Young Men’s Christian Association. Although the YMCA is a private non-profit corporation, its operation of the Pool is state action subject to constitutional restrictions. Not only is the Pool government property, but the City remains intimately involved in its management, maintenance, and repair, partnering with the YMCA in that endeavor. In the YMCA’s operation of the Pool and the public messaging associated with the events at issue here, the YMCA and the City have failed to uphold their constitutional obligations as government actors.
3. Plaintiff Julie Jaman is an eighty-two-year-old resident of Port Townsend, where she has lived for forty-eight years. For much of her life, she has served as an advocate for women survivors of sexual assault and domestic abuse. Until recently, she regularly used the Pool for recreational and therapeutic purposes.
4. That changed on July 26, 2022, when the YMCA summarily and permanently banned Jaman from the Pool. That day, Jaman was showering in the women’s locker room after swimming. While in the shower, she heard a male voice coming from inside the locker room. She opened the shower curtain and saw a male in a female swimsuit—an individual who was later identified to her as “Clementine Adams”—with two young girls as they were preparing to use the toilet. Adams was helping one of the young girls remove her bathing suit.
5. Jaman thought she was witnessing a crime in progress, so she spoke up as best she could under the circumstances: she told Adams to leave the women’s locker room. A YMCA staff person immediately entered the locker room, and Jaman asked the staff member to remove Adams. Instead, the staff person berated Jaman for her “discriminatory” statements toward Adams and told Jaman on the spot that she was “banned for life” from the Pool for objecting to Adams’s presence in the locker room.
6. As Jaman later learned, Adams was a YMCA camp counselor and identified as female. Unbeknownst to Jaman, (1) the YMCA’s policy was to allow patrons to use the locker room consistent with their gender identity irrespective of their sex, (2) Adams had the YMCA’s permission to be in the women’s locker room, and (3) Adams had the YMCA’s permission to assist the young girls in using the toilet.
7. Since the incident, Port Townsend officials and YMCA employees have conspired together to engage in a high-profile public relations campaign designed to justify Jaman’s lifetime ban, to smear her, and to make her appear to be bigoted and a serial harasser of transgender individuals. None of this is true. Jaman supports keeping women’s private spaces reserved for women, but she does not harbor hate towards anyone based on their gender identity, nor has she ever harassed anyone at the Pool or elsewhere. Yet that is exactly what Port Townsend and the YMCA have led the public to believe through their false and misleading statements. Like the YMCA’s operation of the Pool, this smear campaign was unconstitutional state action.
8. To this day, almost two years after the incident, Port Townsend and the YMCA have maintained the lifetime ban against Jaman from using the Pool.
9. Defendants’ actions against Jaman were both unlawful and shameful. When an eighty-year-old woman reasonably believes she is witnessing a crime being committed against young girls in a women’s locker room, the government’s reaction should be to gather all of the facts and learn what happened, not immediately take sides in an ideologically charged political debate. Defendants may not summarily punish Jaman for her speech in reaction to what she saw, nor may they defame her for speaking out.
10. Jaman simply wants to return to the Pool she has used for almost forty years and to be compensated for the deprivation of her rights. The Pool is particularly important to her now that, due to her arthritis, swimming is the best form of exercise available to her. In addition, she wants to continue recreating with her friends and fellow Pool patrons. She wants everyone at the Pool to feel safe and secure in sensitive places. And above all else, she wants her life back.
11. Defendants’ lifetime ban against Jaman, their smear campaign against her, and their refusal to allow her to return to the Pool represents the sad reality of constitutional rights and public safety in Port Townsend. Jaman brings this action to remedy this harm.
City Officials’ Presumption of Guilt
Jaman’s version of the initial exchange between her and Adams has been consistent from day one. She said no more than ten words to the young man in a woman’s swimsuit in the ladies’ locker room. Evidently, Rowen DeLuna — the staff person who berated Jaman for her “discriminatory” statements toward Adams, told Jaman on the spot that she was “banned for life” from the pool, and is named as a defendant in the lawsuit — and/or someone else from the Y felt the need to embellish. Jaman was accused of saying things that anyone who knows her would instantly see as inconsistent with her integrity and nature.
Reporting to his “Leadership Team” the day after the August 1st city council meeting where Jaman shared her experience, and many supporters expressed their concern with how the situation had been handled thus far, Mauro sent out a “note to staff” to set the stage — here’s the official story, we should have no deviations from it, beware of misinformation coming from ’the other side.’
City Manager John Mauro’s communication to staff dated August 2nd, 2022. From CAL lawsuit Exhibits 8-29; page 33.
So that’s that. No questions asked — of Jaman, that is. Here is what the Y said you said. Did you, in fact, say these things? No, that question was never posed to the accused. As kangaroo court a hearing of an event as could possibly be held.
It’s all too familiar in government today, when charges of misinformation are commonly cast by the true misinformers.
The staff member, Adams, did not “endure a barrage of unfair, disrespectful and offensive attacks.”
Jaman had no idea she might encounter a male in the locker room, nor that she was expected to use ‘family changing rooms’ if she wished to avoid exposing herself to such males — because the Y did not make this clear to patrons. Not through signage, announcements in the city newsletter, nor discussion with incoming pool users. Purposely? Perhaps, to avoid the controversy. Or maybe they hadn’t gone all in on the changes themselves?
Mauro continues the sermon with a third point, that being Port Townsend’s designation as a sanctuary city, “welcoming of all residents and our diversity.” He proceeds to launch sideways accusations at Jaman, suggesting she was “intolerant, unkind… fueled by fear, anger and hate.” Again, anyone who knows Julie Jaman knows these inflammatory charges are patently absurd.
Throwing Good Money After Bad
Mauro and his advisors spent $3,000 of our city’s precious treasure to hire a PR firm to help manage the debacle. They produced a Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) bulletin that was posted on the city’s website. It, too, contained falsehoods, including repetition of the claim that Jaman had “made discriminatory and derogatory comments toward” Adams.
Their FAQ also stated that Jaman had engaged in a “documented previous pattern of disrespectful behavior” at the Pool, a defamatory allegation that was news to Jaman. No such “pattern” had ever been discussed with her by Y staff. No documentation was forthcoming when requested. It does not exist. At least it did not exist before ’the incident.’
Have these actors — obviously so willing to make false claims and character assassinations — been foolish enough to do a little creative backstory-building to cover their rear ends in what has turned out to be quite a serious matter? Let us hope not.
Councillor Libby Wennstrom and Mayor David Faber get (dis)honorable mention in the suit, both for their social media posts suggesting that Jaman was “bigoted and intolerant of transgender-identifying individuals,” with Wennstrom going further by insinuating that Jaman’s presence at the Y had potential to undermine the safety of trans-identifying people.
For greater details, read the lawsuit and the appended exhibits (1, 2). Defendants have 21 days to respond once the Court executes the summonses and the defendants are served with same. We will report updates in the comment section as we hear of them.
The defendants in this case — and their partisans, too — would do well to pay heed to one of our more timeless proverbs, which has never had more relevance: Pride comes before a fall.
————————————-
Feature image used with permission, Praetorian Public Relations, Walnut Creek, CA
The Leader‘s April 12 front-page headline “Blue Heron Middle School awarded grant for mental health” caught my attention, reminding me of a recent conversation with a high school teacher revealing that close to half of his students are in counseling for mental health issues.
This seems a staggering number, and reflects what is widely known: Our children are in the midst of a mental health crisis. Anything that might help our youth deal with anxiety and depression, easily accessed during their day at school, promises to be a good and positive change.
So that’s where School-Based Health Centers (SBHC) come in, with Blue Heron Middle School slated to become our county’s latest clinic in the fall of 2024. This article explores the SBHC concept, the entities and funding behind it, and what it all means for parents of students in Jefferson County schools.
More than likely, as a parent, in that pile of papers you signed at the beginning of the school year — and certainly, if your child received a sports physical from the school-based clinic at Port Townsend, Chimacum, or Quilcene — you, like me, signed a release giving permission to Jefferson School Based Health Centers to “perform such medical and therapeutic procedures as may be professionally necessary or advisable for me (or my child’s) health screening, diagnosis, and treatment.”
The form looks like this:
Top portion of page 1 of the two-page form giving parental General Consent for Services. The full form can be viewed here.
There is more to granting this permission than may meet the eye. In 2019, through highly controversial legislation, Washington State provided for out-patient mental health treatment for minors without parental consent. Parents’ rights were removed to even be informed about certain treatments and services that school personnel and outside professionals deemed advisable.
After citizens statewide successfully challenged that legislation earlier this year with the Parents Bill of Rights (more on that below), state policy appears to be in the process of shifting. But revised guidelines have yet to be developed. And local SBHC officials maintain that the parental rights initiative applies only to records kept by public schools, school staff, and school administrations. They contend SBHCs are separate entities from the schools and will not be required to share their records with parents even with the new law.
Parents need to be aware of what current guidelines allow for, who/what is behind the SBHC enterprise, and what is at stake. Even after researching this, the question of what parents are consenting to when they grant blanket permission to Jefferson School Based Health Centers remains shrouded in unknowns.
In 1987, the Seattle City Council funded a three-year pilot of a SBHC at Rainier Beach High School, and services started in 1988. This successful pilot paved the way for Seattle levy funding for SBHCs in 1990 and King County levy funding in 2016. State and federal funding became available for SBHCs statewide in 2021.
There has been rapid growth of SBHC’s across the state in recent years, with diverse operational and funding models, with the number almost doubling since 2017. Today, there are more than 70 SBHC sites, sponsored by more than 25 healthcare agencies, in over 30 school districts – urban, suburban, and rural – across Washington.
According to Gerald Braud, writing for Informed Choice Washington, recent legislation in our state ensures this concept will continue to grow. HB 1225 created a school-based health center program office in the Washington State Department of Health in 2022, staffed with three and half employees at a cost of nearly $2 million a year.
It is not a new concept in Jefferson County, which currently has three SBHCs overseen by Jefferson County Public Health, located at Port Townsend High School, Chimacum High School, and Quilcene K-12. The clinic at Blue Heron, scheduled to open fall of 2024, will be the fourth.
According to the Leader, the grant covering the cost of remodeling the space for the clinic at Blue Heron is from the Washington State Legislature, but the concept and support for the Washington School-Based Health Alliance comes from the increasingly influential, parent non-profit, School-Based Health Alliance, founded in 1995, and based in Washington D.C.
“School-based health care is a powerful tool for achieving health equity among children and adolescents who unjustly experience disparities in outcomes simply because of their race, ethnicity, family income, or where they live. It’s an idea that has gained currency across the country: place critically needed services like medical, behavioral, dental, and vision care directly in schools so that all young people, no matter their ZIP code, have an equal opportunity to learn and grow. At the School-Based Health Alliance, we’ve worked for over 25 years to:
Advance national policy and legislative priorities for the field
Advocate for greater support and funding
Promote high-quality clinical practices and standards
Support data collection and reporting, evaluation, and research
Provide training, technical assistance, and consultation”
Funding Sources and National Partners
Here are the current entities listed as funding this national enterprise:
Pivotal Ventures;
MacKenzie Scott;
Connecticut State Department of Public Health;
Health Resources and Services Administration;
NBA Foundation;
No Kid Hungry by Share Our Strength;
The Leon Lowenstein Foundation;
JBS International – a Celerian Group Company;
Rand Corporation;
National Council for Well Being;
Merck & Co.
I picked a few of these organizations that I thought might stand out for Jefferson County readers so we can understand who is funding the SBHA on a national level.
Pivotal Ventures manages the philanthropic efforts of Melinda French Gates, former wife of Microsoft’s Bill Gates.
MacKenzie Scott is the former wife of Amazon’s Jeff Bezos.
Together, in January 2024, these two donated $23 million to the School-Based Health Alliance to help launch school based health clinics in Atlanta, Chicago, Houston and Miami as well as fund general operations.
Rand Corporation (yes, that Rand!) is usually associated with the military and self-described as “a non-profit institution that helps improve policy and decision making through research and analysis.”
Merck makes, markets, and sells drugs and is self described as “aspiring to be the premier research intensive biopharmaceutical company.”
This enterprise also incorporates corporate interests and advocacy groups in its dozens of SBHA National Partners. Along with health associations and organizations like American Academy of Family Physicians and Boston Children’s Hospital, current partners include Colgate-Palmolive, National LGBTQIA+ Health Education Center, Beyond the Pill, Unity Consortium/United for Adolescent Vaccination, and Conrad Hilton Corporation (full list at bottom*).
As mentioned previously, the Washington School-Based Health Alliance is the state level outreach division of the national SBHA. Here is the current list of entities described as grant funders, event sponsors, and individual donors for the Washington School-Based Health Alliance:
Kaiser Permanente;
Ballmer Group;
Washington Association for Community Health;
ARCORA the Foundation of Delta Dental of Washington;
Washington State Department of Health;
Washington State Health Care Authority;
Community Health Plan of Washington;
Molina Health Care;
Swedish Hospital.
Kaiser Permanente is a health insurance provider in Washington State and, in its own words, “exists to provide high-quality, affordable health care services and to improve the health of our members and the communities we serve.” The latest information I could find stated that in 2019 Kaiser Permanente entered a three year, $1.2 million agreement to provide start-up funds for two school-based health clinics in Washington State.
The Ballmer Group manages former Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer and his wife’s philanthropic efforts. They donated $450,000 to general operations for the Washington SBHA from 2022 to 2025.
“The ACA, through section 4101(a), funded the Health Resources and Services Administration’s (HRSA) School-Based Health Center Capital Program, which provides $50 million a year for four years (2010 through 2013) for one-time funding for construction, renovation, and equipment for SBHCs.”
The pipeline remains open to this day. In 2023, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), through the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), and the Administration for Children and Families (ACF), announced $206 million in grant awards towards youth mental health.
Why This Matters – Losing Parental Consent
Why have I just overloaded you with information? Why should any parent, or anybody in Jefferson County, care about any of this?
“I give permission to Jefferson School Based Health Center to perform such medical and therapeutic procedures as may be professionally necessary or advisable for me (or my child’s) health screening, diagnosis, and treatment.”
What parent could imagine, with those few words regarding medical care at school, that they could be opening a door that allows access to their adolescent children for the massive conglomeration of federal, state, and private entities that populate the above lists? Or that the procedures they are allowing could potentially be provided without their consent?
What have we done by signing this release?
I wish we were talking about what many of us experienced in public school when life was a bit less complicated. You didn’t feel well, you went to the school nurse who looked you over, maybe gave you a band-aid. If you were running a fever, your parents were called to come pick you up.
But it’s not that way anymore.
Please look over the following chart from the website of the Washington School-Based Health Alliance, titled “Providing Health Care to Minors under Washington Law: A summary of health care services that can be provided to minors without parental consent.” School-Based Health Centers are an entry point providing access to these treatments through mental health care or referral to care providers off campus. Critics may note that this graphic is dated July 10, 2015, but I include it because it is posted on the Washington School-Based Health Alliance website, provides the best summary I could find, and continues to reflect the current state of the law.
One change not reflected in this chart regards recent house bills passed in Washington State that some suggest might open the door to gender reassignment surgery for adolescents (13 years and older) without parental consent via out-patient mental health treatment:
SB5904 allows “adolescents to confidentially and independently seek services for mental health and substance use disorders.”
SSB5889 requires insurance providers to communicate only with the person receiving the care regardless of who holds the policy.
And SB5313 bans insurance companies from rejecting gender affirming surgical procedures previously considered cosmetic, if they are deemed medically necessary.
The Pendulum Swings Back – Parents Bill of Rights
On March 4, 2024, the Washington State Legislature passed Initiative 2081 to establish a Parents Bill of Rights, by a wide bi-partisan margin. As a successful citizens initiative, signed by over 450,000 voters, it did not need the governor’s approval and became law ninety days later on June 4.
The opening paragraph of Initiative 2081 reads as follows:
“The legislature finds that: (a) Parents are the primary stakeholders in their children’s upbringing; (b) parental involvement is a significant factor in increasing student achievement; (c) access to student information encourages greater parental involvement.”
The initiative then lists the rights of parents and legal guardians of public school children younger than eighteen years old. Most of the rights mentioned already exist in state law. The key rights defined in this initiative, relative to medical care without parental consent, secures the parental right to inspect their child’s school records in accordance with RCW 28A.605.030.
It goes on to enumerate that public school records include all of the following: public school records, medical or health records, records of any mental health counseling, records of vocational counseling, records of discipline, records of attendance, also notifications of when medical services are being offered to their child, notification of any medical service or medications having been provided that result in any financial impact to the parent’s or legal guardian’s insurance payments or co-pays, notification when the school has arranged directly or indirectly for medical treatment that results in follow up care beyond normal school hours, and immediate notification if their child is taken or removed from their public school campus without parental permission.
Previously the schools followed administrative rules provided by the Washington State School Directors Association, WSSDA. In particular Policy 3211 — Gender Inclusive Schools, and Policy 3211 — Procedures – Gender Inclusive Schools. The key sentence in these procedures is: “Before contacting a student’s parents, the school will consult with the student about the student’s preferences regarding family involvement and consider whether safety concerns are present for the student.”
Parents might also want to know that these procedures seem to suggest setting up two sets of books — “Official Records” under the students legal name, the only one of which is the standardized high school transcript; and “Unofficial Records,” explained in the procedures, kept under the name chosen by the student to represent “how they choose to be addressed in their transgender or gender expansive status.”
The following paragraph from the procedures details the current policy In regards to what schools will release to parents (emphasis mine):
Information about a student’s gender identity, legal name, or assigned sex at birth may constitute confidential medical or educational information. Disclosing this information to other students, their parents, or other third parties may violate privacy laws, such as the federal Family Education Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) (20 U.S.C. §1232; 34 C.F.R. Part 99). Parents have the right under FERPA to request their student’s records and if requested, the District will provide the student’s educational records to the parent according to 3231/3231P.
State and Local Responses to Requests for Clarification
In the second week of May, I contacted Annie Hetzal, the School Health Services Consultant, at the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI), and asked if Washington State Superintendent Chris Reykdal had made any statements or issued instructions to school superintendents in regards to the parental rights initiative so that parents can access all their children’s school records, including from school-based health clinics, as soon as the initiative became law in June.
She told me in a text that the state Superintendent’s latest statement to district superintendents was “that OSPI is working on guidance for schools that is not yet finished.”
To clarify some of these issues on a local level, I contacted Jefferson County Public Health and spoke with Susan O’Brien, a family nurse practitioner in the Jefferson SBHCs.
Susan started with a brief history. Jefferson SBHCs got their start in 2007 with a grant from the Washington State Department of Health. Clinics were opened at Port Townsend High School and Chimacum High School for the 2008/2009 school year. The clinics were finished with donations of labor and materials from citizens and businesses in Jefferson County. This was the community coming together to fill a need that they believed wasn’t being met elsewhere.
The school clinics are primarily run by Jefferson County Public Health in cooperation with Jefferson Healthcare, and the Jefferson County School Districts. The hospital regularly provides funds for the clinics, and has a designated liaison, Dr. Sara Schmidt, who works as the main contact for requests coming from the clinics.
The recent funds from the state legislature are paying only for the remodel of the space at Blue Heron Middle School that will be used as a clinic. This was the first time that funding came from outside the community.
Students are allowed to come in with their friends, often just to ask questions like “What is going on with my body?”
Susan gave me an example of how these clinics can help families new to the community. A parent who just moved here had a child with asthma who needed help. Setting up a primary care provider can take months. The SBHC at the child’s school was able to utilize their close relationship with Jefferson Healthcare to shortcut the process and get the needed treatment for the child.
The Jefferson SBHCs track student use in two categories, medical visits and mental health visits. The information below also details how many “visits” translate into “users” or actual treatment:
Chimacum: 200 medical visits from 89 users, 203 mental health visits from 89 users;
Port Townsend: 325 medical visits from 157 users, 457 mental health visits from 42 users;
Quilcene: 79 medical visits from 40 users, 392 mental health visits from 35 users.
Breakdown of mental health visits and users in the report. Note that Brinnon which is K-8 does not have an SBHC, however their high school students attend Quilcene HS, which does.
Typical requests are sports physicals, birth control, concussion management, immunizations.
If needed, the SBHCs try to work directly with the student’s primary care physician. Other partners in the community include Discovery Behavioral Health and Jefferson Healthcare. Referrals for physical therapy to Jefferson Healthcare or Discovery Physical Therapy in Port Hadlock are not uncommon.
Obtaining Healthcare Without Parental Consent
When I ask about what I have found to be of greatest concern among parents — the ability of adolescents to obtain medical and mental healthcare without parental consent — Susan is clear in stating: “We follow the laws of Washington state. At the same time, we encourage the students to talk to their parents. Some students don’t feel safe. That’s why we have these laws in Washington state.”
If there is a problem with care received at a Jefferson SBHC, the practitioners, who are licensed employees of Jefferson Public Health, would be the responsible party. There is no direct state oversight. However, the Jefferson County Board of Health and Health Officer for Jefferson County, Dr. Allison Berry, provides oversight of the clinics at the county level.
Susan O’Brien stated, “The most important thing for parents to know is that school-based clinics are like clinics anywhere in Washington state — adolescents can receive mental health care without their parent’s consent.” She went on to explain that what the practitioners in the Jefferson SBHCs want is to support kids to be healthy in every way possible. Parents, she said, can choose for their children to not use the SBHCs if they so wish.
The Jefferson County Public Health website is not clear regarding that assertion. While their page about SBHCs notes that “students must be registered with signed parental consent to be seen for medical concerns,” it also displays a prominent notice assuring teens that they can access many services without their parents’ knowledge.
Notice featured on Jefferson County Public Health’s website describing SBHC’s “Confidential & affordable healthcare for students.”
As to the parental rights initiative, Susan confirmed that the Jefferson SBHCs have yet to receive any guidance from the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction and “will be following the laws of Washington state.” As noted earlier, Jefferson County Public Health’s current position is that the Parents Bill of Rights will not affect their policies, that it applies only to records kept by public schools, school staff, and school administrations. Susan says the SBHCs are separate entities from the schools and will not be required to share their records with parents. She summarized it this way:
“We don’t share our records with the schools, and the schools don’t share their records with us.“
It remains to be seen how or if the parental rights initiative will be implemented as the law now goes into effect (assuming it survives an off-mission American Civil Liberties Union legal challenge).
Ultimately, if parents are unhappy with the current state of affairs, it will be up to these parents to become familiar with current state law to establish their rights, while working cooperatively with their school administrators, school boards, and School-Based Health Centers to get the information they need to care for their children.
—————————————————-
—————————————————-
*Full list of SBHA National Partners: AASA/The School Superintendents Association; American Academy of Family Physicians; Adolescent Health Initiative; Alliance for a Healthier Generation; American School Counselor Association; Apex; Association of Asian Pacific Community Health Organizations; ASTDD; Bi-State Primary Care Association; Beyond the Pill; The Center for Health and Healthcare in Schools, Child Trends, Coalitions for Community Schools; Institution for Educational Leadership; Community Health Center, Inc.; Conrad Hilton Corporation; Farmworker Justice; National LGBTQIA+ Health Education Center; Futures Without Violence; Health Outreach Partners; Johns Hopkins Consortium for School Based Health Solutions; Kaiser Permanente Thriving Schools; Mental Health Technology Transfer Center Network; Mid-Atlantic Tele-Health Resource Center; South Carolina Telehealth Alliance; Medical University of South Carolina; National Association of Community Health Centers; National Center for School Mental Health; National Health Care for the Homeless Council; Public Health Management Corporation’s National Nurse-Led Care Consortium; Trust for America’s Health; University of California/San Francisco; Unity Consortium/United for Adolescent Vaccination; American Academy of Pediatrics; Kaiser Permanente; National Association of Community Health Workers; Center for Adoption Support and Education; Prevent Blindness; Moses/Weitzman Health System; National Association of School Nurses; National Center for Safe Supportive Schools; Colgate-Palmolive; National Association of School Psychologists; Health Leads; Boston Children’s Hospital.
Welcome to The Jefferson County Beacon, which describes itself as “a worker-directed nonprofit news outlet managed by a board of your friends and neighbors.”
But who has actually financed this new “local” initiative? A little digging reveals that it is part of a national news network being built and funded by billionaire globalists.
Clicking the “Support Local News” link beneath the Beacon directs to where folks can donate “$5,000+” or other amounts to this 501(c)(3) nonprofit whose Donor Transparency Policy pledges to “make public all revenue sources and donors who give $5,000 or more per year.”
Clicking the Beacon‘s “About” menu “Fiscal Sponsor” link points to the Institute for Nonprofit News (INN), whose mission is “to build a nonprofit news network that ensures all people in every community have access to trusted news.”
INN’s mission is part of the Trusted News Initiative, described by Influence Watch as “a coalition of left-of-center media, social media, and technology companies created by the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) in 2019 with the ‘specific aims of flagging disinformation during elections,’ and to also censor what the initiative deems is misinformation… Organizations that are partners of the initiative include the Associated Press, BBC, European Broadcasting Union (EBU), Meta, Microsoft, Thomson Reuters, Google, Twitter, and The Washington Post.”
This alliance’s collusion currently faces antitrust challenges because while it “publicly purports to be a self-appointed ‘truth police’ extirpating online ‘misinformation,’ in fact it has suppressed wholly accurate and legitimate reporting in furtherance of the economic self-interest of its members.”
Clicking its “Network” link brings up the INN Network Directory where you are encouraged to Find Your News. It lists “more than 425 independent news organizations in a new kind of news network” that the Beacon has now joined, which “the Institute for Nonprofit News (INN) strengthens and supports.”
Examples of other INN Network community news sites using similar design templates, donation links, and policy language.
Browsing through several of these INN Network Directory news sites, they all appear to be cookie-cutter websites based on similar design templates, similar donation links, and similar boilerplate policy language as The Jefferson County Beacon, despite each purporting to be “local”, “independent”, and “community-supported.”
Follow The Money
Who actually bankrolls the INN and its network of news sites like the Beacon? According to its Supporters & Financials page, the Democracy Fund and Google News Initiative and several left-leaning foundations contribute more than $500,000 each, along with lesser donations from Microsoft and many others.
What is the Democracy Fund? According to its Financials page, it was “established and solely funded by philanthropist and eBay founder Pierre Omidyar” then spun off to the billionaire’s Omidyar Network, which describes itself as “a social change venture that reimagines critical systems, and the ideas that govern them, to build more inclusive and equitable societies … across the globe.”
“Unbiased” Reporting?
The Beaconsays it wants to hire local reporters with “a passion for independent news” to “tell the Local story with an unbiased approach.”
This “unbiased” start-up seeks local hires funded by international moneyed interests with a plan to change society in ways that arguably eliminate freedoms and diversity and tighten top-down controls. It comes at a time when a majority of networked media outlets purporting to be local and independent actually adhere to the same copycat globalist-directed scripts.
Remember the viral video exposing nearly 200 “local” CBS, ABC, NBC, and Fox affiliate anchors reciting an identical message about fake news?
Click to watch 1 minute-36 second viral video, exposing the script from the Sinclair Broadcast Group, which controls news stations nationwide.
Each of the affiliates first explained that their greatest responsibility was to serve their (fill-in-the-blank) communities, and then went on in scripted unison to decry other news sources as biased and irresponsible. The eerie compilation of voices, all stressing the same words, warned “This is extremelydangerous to our democracy.”
The expanding INN news initiative, already comprising more than 425 “independent” publications that the Beacon is now allied with, also coincides with a parallel effort by Soros Fund Management to embark on a “large audio-buying spree,” adding to the hundreds of US radio stations the George Soros group currently owns.
Consolidation of messaging to support a global agenda continues apace.
Given its origin as “a social change venture” funded by tech-giant billionaires, the Beacon should be mindful and honest about its own dependencies and biases… especially compared to the Port Townsend Leader, which (whatever its shortcomings) remains one of the last local independent papers in the country.
The Beaconsays it “was born when it became clear that Jefferson County needed a community-focused newspaper,” pretending the Leader does not focus on the county community. But what “community” does the Beacon feel the need to focus on?
Our politically-diverse county at large?
Or some like-minded coterie seeking an echo chamber free from viewpoints it blames the Leader — which for years has heavily censored local voices like those represented in the Port Townsend Free Press (see articles here, here, and here) — for not censoring enough?
May these qualms prove unfounded and the Beacon live up to its name, shining the light of truth as a vibrant part of our local media ecosystem.
The day they thought would never come arrived on Tuesday, March 19th, 2024, when the City of Port Townsend and the Olympic Peninsula YMCA received an unwelcome bit of news from a litigation team at the Center for American Liberty, representing longtime Port Townsend resident, Julie Jaman.
As reported by the national news website, the Daily Wire, the clock has run out on the YMCA’s and city’s dodging of responsibility for the debacle that ensued after Jaman was banned for life from the Mountain View Pool a year and a half ago.
Regular readers of the PT Free Press are familiar with the outrageous treatment Jaman (and eventually her supporters) faced in July and August of 2022. (Access our extensive reporting with the link following this article.)
According to the demand letter from the Center for American Liberty, “The City’s and the YMCA’s conduct violated the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution… and Washington law.” The letter was addressed to City Manager John Mauro, acting City Attorney Kendra Rosenberg, and Olympic Peninsula YMCA CEO, Wendy Bart.
“The Center for American Liberty sent a demand letter to the YMCA and the City of Port Townsend on Julie’s behalf threatening imminent litigation if Julie’s lifetime ban is not immediately lifted. The City of Port Townsend and the YMCA punished Julie because of the content of her speech—because she spoke out after seeing a man in the women’s locker room. Julie deserves justice for the violation of her First Amendment rights and the emotional distress she’s experienced because of this ordeal.”
Though a relatively young enterprise, in practice since 2018, the Center for American Liberty is blazing trails as it defends parental rights, constitutionally protected speech and religious liberties. They’ve emerged as a powerhouse in the woke arena of coercive “gender transitioning” of young children and teenagers, including the now nationally-recognized ‘detransitioner,’ Chloe Cole.
Page one of Center for American Liberty demand letter
Setting the stage
The 8-page letter accompanies over 200 pages of duplicative public records, many redacted — communications between city officials, the YMCA and the public relations firm contracted by the city to manage the mess they’d created by refusing to even consider Jaman’s version of the episode, devoted as they were to ideology rather than fairness and accuracy.
The demand letter references the unlawful ban of Jaman, provides a bit of factual background, and swiftly moves on to “The Locker-Room Incident.” (The following are excerpted quotes. For legal reasoning supporting them, please read the entire eight pages.)
On July 26, 2022, Jaman went for a swim at the Pool. After she finished, she entered the women’s locker room to shower and change. There were no signs warning patrons that the locker rooms were open to members of the opposite sex. In fact, the signage indicated that the locker rooms were sex segregated.
While in the shower, Jaman heard a male voice inside the locker room. When she pulled back the shower curtain to see who was there, she saw a biological male wearing a female swimsuit. The individual—later identified to Jaman as “Clementine Adams”—was watching two young girls who appeared to be about four to six years old as they were preparing to use the toilet. Adams was not wearing any form of identification indicating an affiliation with the YMCA.
Jaman was startled by Adams’s presence in the women’s locker room and believed that she might be witnessing a crime in progress. Jaman asked Adams, “Do you have a penis?” Adams responded, “None of your business,” after which Jaman said, “Get out of here!”
Within seconds, YMCA staff member Rowen DeLuna entered the women’s shower area and began berating Jaman. DeLuna did not inform Jaman that Adams was transgender, that Adams was an employee of the YMCA, or that the Pool had a policy allowing individuals to use the locker rooms that aligned with their gender identity. Instead, DeLuna informed Jaman that her speech toward Adams was “discriminatory,” that she was “banned for life” from the YMCA because of her speech, and that she could no longer set foot inside the facility.
In addition, DeLuna told Jaman to leave or she would call the police. Jaman told DeLuna that she too wanted the police involved so they could investigate potential misconduct. YMCA staff called 911 and asked for the police to escort Jaman from the premises. A recording of this call reveals that the YMCA staff told the police that Jaman was harassing YMCA employees and belligerently refusing to leave. None of this was true.
None of this was true. It’s important to reiterate this statement from the law firm, and to highlight the effort by several operators within the city administration to carefully craft the narrative before it went public.
Example of redacted communications between the city and the public relations firm hired to provide damage control (page 31, Exhibit C).
More from the Center for American Liberty’s demand letter:
On August 11, 2022—in the wake of significant local and national media attention—the City released an official Q&A discussing the July 26 incident... In the Q&A, the City said — falsely — that Jaman had engaged in a “documented previous pattern of disrespectful behavior.” … The YMCA made similar false statements to the media.See Exhibit B (quoting YMCA’s statement asserting that Jaman had “repeatedly violated the [YMCA’s] code of conduct”). Despite multiple requests, neither the City nor the YMCA has explained this alleged prior misconduct.
Emails and other documents obtained through public-records requests reveal that in the weeks following the July 26 incident, City officials were intimately involved in responding to concerns within the community regarding operation of the Pool. This included what appears to be a coordinated effort involving Mayor David Faber, City Manager John Mauro, and City Councilwoman Libby Wennstrom, among others, working with the YMCA and Feary [sic] Public Relations — a crisis communications firm hired by the City — to develop a public response to the incident.
This public relations campaign included statements to the media, social media posts, the above-mentioned Q&A, and other statements by members of the City Council.See, e.g., Exhibits C–F. These statements labeled Jaman as hateful and bigoted and indicated that she had engaged in a pattern of conduct that violated the YMCA’s policies. None of this is true.
While the above brief synopsis mentions the YMCA’s denial of evidence for its mendacious claims of Jaman’s prior “disrespectful behavior,” it bears repeating here — none of the supposed documentation was ever produced. Julie Jaman asked for it again and again. It does not exist. It was all a fabrication.
Jefferson County resident Crystal Cox requested a copy of the contract with Fearey. The $3,000 charged by the crisis communications firm to run interference for city hall is now just the start of what it will cost taxpayers to deal with the city’s gross mismanagement of a sensitive situation.
The City and the YMCA Violated the First Amendment
The First Amendment prohibits the government from retaliating against individuals forexercising their First Amendment rights... Moreover, the government may not discriminate against speech exercised on public property based on its viewpoint.
First, Jaman’s ban was in retaliation for her protected speech. When Jaman saw Adams accompanying two young girls in the women’s locker room and watching them while they undressed, she was concerned she was witnessing unlawful conduct.
To be sure, the government may, in appropriate cases, take action to protect its employees from harassing conduct of third parties. But Jaman’s comments did not come remotely close to the line of losing protection under the First Amendment or otherwise justifying the YMCA’s response.
By banning Jaman from the Pool based on her speech, the City and the YMCA retaliated against her for engaging in protected activity.
Second, the YMCA engaged in viewpoint discrimination on public property and acted unreasonably in banning Jaman. The government engages in viewpoint discrimination when it allows speech favoring one side of a debate but not the other.
The City and the YMCA Violated the Fourteenth Amendment
The City and the YMCA also violated Jaman’s due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment. The Due Process Clause prohibits the government from depriving an individual of fundamental rights absent due process of law… Exercising First Amendment rights on public property is a protected liberty interest.
The YMCA banned Jaman for life immediately upon hearing her object to Adams’s presence in the locker room. It provided her no notice of its locker-room policy or that such objection would be deemed a violation of the YMCA’s conduct policies.
The City and the YMCA Violated Washington Law
The City and the YMCA also violated Washington common law. The statements that the City and the YMCA published about Jaman were false and defamatory per se, and the City and the YMCA acted in reckless disregard of the truth, at least.
Further, the City’s and the YMCA’s coordinated public relations campaign against Jaman amounts to the intentional infliction of emotional distress… And both the City and the YMCA were negligent in various ways, including but not limited to failing to warn patrons that persons of the opposite biological sex may be in sex-segregated locker-rooms…
The City and YMCA Must Cease their Unlawful Conduct
The City’s and the YMCA’s actions against Jaman were not only unlawful but also shameful. When an 80-year-old woman reasonably believes she is witnessing a crime against minors in a women’s showering area, the government’s reaction should be to gather all of the facts and learn what happened, not take sides in an ideologically charged debate.
Moreover, the public records obtained since the incident show City officials and YMCA employees engaged in a sophisticated and coordinated public relations campaign to smear Jaman and make her appear to be bigoted and dangerous to transgender individuals. This couldn’t be further from the truth. It is true that Jaman supports keeping women’s spaces reserved for biological women. But she does not harbor hate towards anyone based on their gender identity, nor has she ever engaged in harassment at the Pool or elsewhere. Yet that is exactly what the City and the YMCA have led the public to believe through their false and misleading statements.
Lead attorney, Harmeet Dhillon, closes with this:
“To remedy the unlawful conduct against my client, I demand the following: (1) the City and the YMCA lift the ban against Jaman; (2) the City and the YMCA issue a formal apology to Jaman for their actions against her; and (3) the City and the YMCA pay Jaman the sum of $350,000 for her emotional distress arising out of the incident.”
City officials and the YMCA CEO have until 5pm on Wednesday, March 27, 2024 to respond, or they can expect to meet Jaman, her local counsel Rosemary Schurman, and the Center for American Liberty — in court.
Administrators and elected officials in Port Townsend’s city hall are painfully familiar with charges of subverted public processes, and rightfully so. Sims Way poplars, the golf course, streateries, the pool — each of these controversial projects followed trajectories reflecting desires and preferred outcomes of those in power at the expense of transparency and honest efforts at citizen engagement.
Yet another attempt by the city to avoid transparency and manipulate public process has come to light.
In the course of exploring options for Port Townsend’s aging Mountain View pool, City Manager John Mauro and the city’s Director of Parks and Recreation Strategy Carrie Hite have told us there were only two choices. We “do nothing” and wait for the pool’s inevitable closure. Or the City of Port Townsend plus all the county’s taxpayers take on the massive debt of a grandiose $37-50 million aquatic center that citizens are calling the Taj Mahal (see articles here, here, here, here, and here).
Citizens asked repeatedly, What about renovating the existing pool? Mauro and Hite insisted that repairing and upgrading the pool would be prohibitively expensive — that the only option is a full-scale redevelopment of the entire Mountain View complex.
More than half a million dollars later, it turns out that reports provided by experts hired to evaluate the options show their assertion is untrue. And that those reports were kept not only from taxpayers, but also from the city council.
It took two citizens’ requests for documents that are supposed to be publicly available to uncover these suppressed reports.
They revealed estimates to completely refurbish and modernize the pool for $4-$5 million.
First Consultant’s Report
Last summer, the city commissioned Water Technology, Inc. (WTI) to evaluate the condition of the Mountain View pool and estimate the costs of remedying any problems found. WTI provides designs for new pools and the “refreshing” of old pools. In their field, which is primarily traditional construction methodology, they are considered a global leader.
WTI conducted an on-site investigation of the Mountain View pool and provided its report to the city six months ago on September 8, 2023. They found plenty of signs reflecting the age of the facility, the same problems we have heard about from city and YMCA staff, namely:
leakage in the pool vessel;
rippling in the pool liner;
ineffective pool gutter;
clogged drains;
deteriorated pool deck;
corrosion;
lack of underwater lighting;
insufficient HVAC ventilation;
inefficient and problematic pump;
deteriorated heat exchanger;
absence of secondary disinfectant system;
less significant issues such as ceiling bulbs needing replacement.
Example from WTI report of photos and written assessments (from Page 4 of PDF).
WTI estimated that all the deficiencies it found could be repaired and remedied for $2.875 million. For $3.5 million the Mountain View facility could be fully modernized, with complete reconstruction of the pool vessel, pool deck, piping, deck drainage and mechanical systems. They stated:
The newly constructed pool vessel will be designed and engineered to modern standards of quality and compliance and be supported by today’s advanced mechanical, filtration and water treatment systems.
The $3.5 million reconstruction would include:
New lap pool of 3,400 square feet;
Water depth zero to ten feet;
Quartz aggregate finish with tile border and markings;
Four lap lanes with starting platforms;
Shallow water program area.
WTI did not intend to paint only a rosy picture. Their conclusion was clear, and certainly no surprise. New is better, if one can afford new…
There is a significant investment required to provide aquatic amenities to the community which are maintainable long-term. However, lower levels of capital inputs for repairs or renovations in the short-term often result in higher total expenditures in the long-term. This report finds the Port Townsend community would be best served, both programmatically and financially, with a new aquatic facility. A modern aquatic center can provide the durability and efficiencies to enable a more effective and sustainable facility over a lifespan measured in decades than the existing facility after repairs and renovations.
But do we have the resources for a Taj Mahal? With city finances currently falling off a “fiscal cliff”, essential services like water and sewer are at risk right now in Port Townsend. Does “living within our means” apply to governments in the least? Bureaucrats spending other people’s money without consequence for catastrophic failure has led many cities in this country to bankruptcy.
Second Consultant “Found Minimal Damage to the Existing Structure”
WTI’s report did not look into the condition of the building. For that the city retained the services of CG Engineering of Edmonds, Washington “to assist the City with determining the scope and cost of rehabilitating the pool building,” according to the firm’s October 30, 2023 Structural Assessment Report.
CG Engineering inspected the pool on October 10. Water staining was observed on the ceiling. But rotting damage was not found; the stains were superficial. “Roof decking appeared in good condition,” the engineers concluded. Rust and rust stains were also observed at locations around the building.
Dozens of photographs document CG Engineering’s assessment of the Mountain View Pool building’s structure. Page 10 of the 10/30/23 Structural Assessment Report.
Structural elements are in good condition. The concrete walls are in good condition. A pool equipment pad was corroded and deteriorated. A crack in the men’s locker room floor was a shrinkage crack and did not compromise structural integrity. The same conclusion was reached regarding observed hairline fractures in locker room walls.
Director of Parks and Recreation Strategy Hite (who holds neither an engineering degree nor a contractor’s license) has asserted that the pool is doomed and beyond repair partly because of the tunnel under the building.
Not so, concluded the engineers. Yes, the metal decking in the tunnel was severely corroded and had fallen away in several places. But “the decking appears to be non-structural and was likely formwork used during the original construction.” Cracking in the sidewalk slab directly above the tunnel was due to temperature differentials and did not compromise structural integrity, they said.
CG Engineering concluded:
Generally, we found minimal damage to the existing structure. Water staining and rust on the roof framing and steel connectors appeared superficial. The recently added vinyl roof coating appears to have been successful in temporarily preventing further water intrusion to the structural framing. Minor cracks in the concrete/CMU walls and concrete slabs appeared to be temperature and shrinkage related and should not affect the integrity of the structure.
CG Engineering’s recommended remedies came to an estimated cost of $536,643. There is only a partial cost of $300,000 estimated for a new roof which has been quoted elsewhere at $1.07 million. If the higher roofing estimate is accurate, that could bring the structural total to $1.3 million. And there is a to-be-determined line item for seismic retrofit. Seismic retrofits are not necessarily required and that appears to be the case for Mountain View since the city never asked any firm to estimate that cost.
Thus, based on these two consultant’s reports, the combined cost of remedying the building’s deficiencies and completely modernizing and upgrading the aquatic components comes to less than $5 million ($3.5M + $1.3M). Not the tens of millions we have been told it would take to provide a place for children to learn to swim and elders to recreate.
Why did city employees keep this news from the city council and the taxpayers who paid for those reports?
Why was public digging necessary to reveal this information?
Enter the Third Consultant’s Report
The WTI and CG Engineering reports, only recently disclosed, were respectively received by the city six months and four months ago. Both firms have decades of experience in these kinds of analyses.
From minutes of the August 8, 2023 workshop of the Healthier Together Aquatic Center steering committee we learn that these two reports were anticipated by mid-September. The minutes noted:
From minutes of the August 8, 2023 Healthier Together Aquatic Center steering committee meeting with Carrie Hite and eight others in attendance. The meeting focused mostly on using the creation of a Public Facilities District (PFD) as a funding mechanism for the proposed new aquatic center, and strategies for winning approval of a new tax ballot measure brought to county voters.
But upon receipt of WTI’s September 8 Mountain View Pool Evaluation and CG Engineering’s October 30 Structural Assessment Report, neither report assessing the possibilities for upgrading the pool and building was disclosed by the city. When both of the above reports revealed less than a $5 million price tag likely for full repair and renovation, it appears Hite and Mauro took another approach.
A third consultant’s report was commissioned. The city contracted DCW Cost Management, a generalized cost-estimating firm in Seattle with no specific expertise in pools, to do a “Cost Study.”
Unlike the first two reports which present documenting photos and written analysis to remedy existing conditions, DCW’s Cost Study, obtained months later, shows no evidence that the firm assessed anything about the existing pool and structure. Other than saving and repairing some windows and exterior doors and repairing a roof drain, it appears that most if not all of the structure, and every system and all contents were to be replaced with new ones. We are told that “Cost [sic] are developed using existing as-built drawings.”
This cost study herein attempts to address the modernization of the existing facility to meet current code and for the pool to meet competition standards for Jefferson County students. The interior renovation includes new interior finishes, pool expansion and building extension, resurfacing of the pool deck, acoustic wall treatment to the natatorium, new plumbing where systems are broken, mechanical and electrical upgrades to current code.
No drawings or plans are shown, only costs. But reading through the 18 pages which include demolition, mass excavation, earthwork and other site preparation — even $153,000 in new landscaping — the impression is that they have taken a wrecking ball to the current building and used the existing as-built drawings to price out a complete rebuild.
Costs are delineated for components such as roofing ($1.07M), superstructure ($1.77M), plumbing systems ($2.67M), and heating, ventilation and cooling ($1.64M). Every pipe fitting, piece of tile and drain is itemized. There is a $1,530 line item for a 60 square foot “locker room graphic.”
We asked professional contractor Mark Grant of Grant Steel Buildings and Concrete Systems, Inc., who has scrutinized this study, for his impressions.
“Your interpretation is correct in that the DCW pool renovation cost study reflects nearly a complete tear down and rebuild of the entire facility. It is a stretch to refer to the scope of work shown in the DCW report as a renovation.”
He believes it’s prudent to add more for contingencies than is allowed for in the $4-$5 million total of the first two reports. But even another million or two will not come close to DCW’s $21 million rebuild price tag the city is claiming is an under-estimate.
Strategy: City Management Gaming the Public
In November 2023, as a member of the Healthier Together Aquatic Center steering committee, City Manager John Mauro acknowledged to the Jefferson County Commissioners that taxpayer funds in excess of half a million dollars had already been spent in pursuit of the “Taj Mahal” aquatic center project. Consultant fees and other trackable expenses have at this point amounted to over $721,000 — including more than $555,000 from the city, $105,000 from the county, and $50,000 from the Jefferson County Hospital District.
All has been spent in service of convincing the public that if we are to have a community pool in years to come, our only option is the fantastically expensive design presented in June of 2023.
In April of 2022 Mauro hired Carrie Hite to fill the city’s new Director of Parks and Recreation Strategy staff position. That role was created to direct the process and strategize the narrative to sell us on several large-scale city projects, including a lavish new aquatic center beyond our means.
Hundreds of thousands of dollars were spent on staff time and consultant fees, presenting the community with this grandiose vision that would require new taxation. Hite and Mauro repeatedly dismissed what should have been the first consideration — expert analysis of the cost to rehabilitate and upgrade the existing pool and building.
When the Healthier Together Aquatic Center plan was unveiled five months after the steering committee first met, there was tremendous community pushback. Homemade “NO PT POOL TAX” signs appeared around the county (see closing photos). Local professionals challenged the city’s assertion that there was no saving the existing pool.
Public pressure pushed the city to finally hire firms to assess the pool and structure and do long overdue cost analyses on a rehab. No doubt Mauro and Hite were looking to justify the supposed impossibility of bringing the Mountain View facility up to snuff. And one would expect that the outlay of yet more consultant money would drive the city to choose the best qualified firms in the field to do the job.
Both initial contractors WTI and CG Engineering appear to have those qualifications. Both have decades of experience. Both made thorough assessments that are well documented.
It appears that when the first two reports did not support the steering committee’s agenda for their flashy new aquatic center, those reports were kept under wraps. A third consultant was hired, a general “cost management” firm. The new kid on the block was given a vastly expanded “tear down and replace'” scope of work.
This interpretation of events is borne out by exchanges between Carrie Hite and Port Townsend resident Musa Jaman, who submitted a request for documents analyzing repairs needed to upgrade the existing pool. In response to a Facebook post from city council member Libby Wennstrom about the pool, Jaman asked where she could get accurate numbers. Wennstrom referred her to Carrie Hite.
Jaman’s email to Hite on November 22, 2023 titled “Public document request” asked “about getting access to the document analyzing the existing pool issues and associated costs to take care of repairs and upgrades along with operational and general maintenance costs.”
Hite responded on November 28, stalling:
“I have forwarded your public records request to our public records officer… The full cost analysis report that we commissioned will not be ready until next week sometime.”
While two reports that performed the analysis Jaman had asked for were already in the city’s possession, they were not disclosed.
On December 12, 2023, Carrie Hite again demonstrated her qualifications as Director of Strategy. She sent Jaman an email explaining the delay, again ignoring the first two reports, and emphasizing her contention that rehabilitation of the existing pool would be even more expensive than the new, expanded 21-million-dollar estimate from DCW that was now in hand.
Hite wrote, in part:
Hi Musa:
I held your PRR as a continued request so I could email you the cost study that was completed by DCW…
The $21M estimate is based on what is visible and given the age and unknowns around the current structure, as well as the rising costs for construction, this number is likely a conservative estimate.
Despite the existence of two credible reports received months earlier proving there were more affordable options, strategist Hite did not reveal the WTI and CG Engineering documents when they were requested. Instead, she waited until the city had obtained another report to support her “too expensive to fix” narrative.
When documents were finally sent to Jaman, the first report — commissioned from “global leaders” in aquatic planning, design and engineering, WTI — was omitted. Only CG Engineering and DCW files were in the attachments Jaman received.
The September 8, 2023 WTI pool evaluation was uncovered separately through a Public Records Request (PRR) by a member of a new group that had formed, the All County Citizens Alliance. He learned of the report’s existence from the minutes of the August 8 pool steering committee meeting, filed a PRR for it, and shared the document with the group.
We try to keep it at a high level:
Obfuscation, half-truths and outright falsehoods
Following receipt of WTI’s report through the PRR, Jim Scarantino, “on behalf of the All County Citizens Alliance,” attended the January 8, 2024 City Council workshop. He delivered “good news” in a public comment about the two studies that had been withheld from the council:
Unfortunately, somehow [the reports] didn’t make it into your packets on November 13th, and later on when you considered the pool.
What those two engineering firms found was that there was minimal damage to the Mountain View pool. And that the building can be repaired for $536,000… And that the pool can be completely replaced and modernized with the latest modern equipment, including a new pool with a shallow entry for parents and children, for $3.5 million, for a total of $4.1 million.…
I don’t know why city staff didn’t notify you of that, but we’re happy to do so.
The responses from Carrie Hite and John Mauro that followed are a master class in verbal ju jitsu, misrepresenting, and false statements.
Hite explained that the WTI assessment is just a “partial report”:
It doesn’t include seismic or ADA or building structures, roof or anything that has to do with the building at all. And so we, the city, contracted out with CGI [conflated with DCW], which is a construction management firm and cost estimator.
And they came back with a $21 million number for the full meal deal. And that was a very high risk number in which to rehab the pool…
There was an additional report that Jim referenced, the CG Engineering in October.
It was just up [sic] the roof…
“Just up the roof” is not only garbled — if, as it appears from context, she meant their report was “just about (or for) the roof” — that statement is flat-out false.
As we have shown, CG Engineering supplemented WTI’s report on the aquatic component of the equation with a full “assessment of the Mountain View Pool building’s structure.” Along with roof replacement, their Structural Assessment Report includes concrete walls, steel pipe columns, concrete slabs, pool room structural elements, and mechanical access tunnels.
Seismic wasn’t requested, nor is it included in any line items in the $21 million “full meal deal” from DCW. It is true that ADA was not addressed, but according to DCWs cost study those add-ons would amount to just $9,990 for an ADA-compliant shower, ramp & detectors, and parking signs.
The “full meal” from DCW offered the easy out — $21 million! By changing the scope of work to a “tear down and replace,” the full meal became a smorgasbord. Far from the rehab option that the community had been requesting which the first two reports looked at, it was an all-you-can-eat buffet with $1,500 locker room graphics and $153,000 of new outdoor landscaping for our indoor swim.
“And that 21 million might be 26, might be 27,” Hite told council.
She then said that “the steering committee saw that [DCW] report,” but made “the recommendation not to put a dollar into the old pool, because we can’t get any state and federal money or grants or philanthropy for that old pool.”
She concluded:
So those reports are operational in nature. We try to keep it at a high level.
If you want the details, I’d be happy to send it to you. But we really tried to go through the steering committee first and keep it at a very high level and make some decisions based on the full report, not a partial report.
John Mauro jumped in:
Can I also add to that, that report has been available online for some time?…
And not to mince words too much, because I know this is a game.
But it’s easy to cherry pick numbers and manufacture a different truth.
A game it is. City Manager Mauro did not create the position of Director of Parks and Recreation Strategy to oversee a practical renovation of “that old pool.” Carrie Hite was hired to sell us a “very high level” new aquatic center.
And her “happy to send you the details” was for just one report, DCW’s full meal deal.
When the reports were requested, that $21 million “tear down and replace” cost study was the only one made available to council members. That is the one Mauro references that was online. To this day, it remains the only one of the three posted by the city.
The initial WTI and CG Engineering reports, totaling less than $5 million, are not disclosed on the city’s website. On the “Healthier Together” aquatic center web page under “Materials Available for Review,” there is no mention of the two firms’ analyses and findings that support sensible renovation and modernization of the existing pool.
When kids are the age likely to believe in Santa and are taught starting in pre-kindergarten — through social media, kids TV shows, some adults, and their peers — that they can pick their gender, the confusion we are seeing makes sense. It took me one thoughtful conversation to tell my kids the truth about Santa, but it took many conversations to explain that they can’t change their bodies from boy to girl (and vice versa). The actual facts about this theory are clearly summarized in the article The Ideological Subversion of Biology.
WTI’s report did not look into the condition of the building. For that the city retained the services of 
The WTI and CG Engineering reports, only recently disclosed, were respectively received by the city six months and four months ago. Both firms have decades of experience in these kinds of analyses.
