Where CUSD Stands on Parental Opt-Outs — Survey #21

From 2026-07-30 to 2026-08-29

Verified voters: 75 (Total: 91)

My name is Long Jiao, and as a member of the CUSD Board of Education, I want to hear from our community. This survey is conducted solely by me and does not represent the official position of the full CUSD Board.

CUSD currently allows parents to opt their child out of instruction on religious grounds, consistent with the U.S. Supreme Court's Mahmoud v. Taylor decision (June 2025) and Board Policy 6141.2. For 2026-27, the district refined how this works — notably, parents must now request in advance to be notified when a teacher uses supplemental materials beyond the adopted curriculum (previously, the whole class was notified). A neighboring district, Sunnyvale, went the other way and ended opt-outs, which led to a lawsuit.

This survey asks a few things: how aware you are of these developments, your own view on the opt-out question, and who should decide changes like these. You can read the full background and join the discussion here. Please share your perspective below.

Summary

Q1.

Are you aware that in 2025 the U.S. Supreme Court (Mahmoud v. Taylor) ruled that parents have a right, on religious grounds, to be notified and to opt their children out of certain LGBTQ+-themed lessons in public school?

90 answered

Yes38 (52) · 58%

No30 (31) · 34%

Unsure3 (4) · 4%

Q2.

Are you aware that our neighbor, Sunnyvale School District, ended its opt-out in early 2026 and was sued in June 2026? For details, see the full background.

90 answered

Yes14 (18) · 20%

No57 (68) · 76%

Unsure1 (2) · 2%

Q3.

Are you aware that for 2026-27, CUSD's administration changed the district's practice so that parents are no longer automatically notified when a teacher uses supplemental materials, unless they request notice by August 27, 2026 (the notice needed to request a religious opt-out)?

90 answered

Yes13 (16) · 18%

No61 (74) · 82%

Unsure0 (0) · 0%

Q4.

Two positions are in tension. Which is closer to your view?

91 answered

The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.46 (58) · 64%

The Sunnyvale district's position — LGBTQ+-inclusive instruction is core curriculum under California law and should apply to all students, without an opt-out.18 (22) · 24%

Somewhere in between / it depends5 (5) · 5%

Unsure1 (1) · 1%

Q5.

Decisions on politically or religiously sensitive issues can be made by district administrators applying the law, or reserved to the elected board. Which do you support?

86 answered

Reserved to the elected board, decided in a public vote32 (40) · 47%

Left to administrators, applying existing law15 (18) · 21%

Administrators may act, but only with public board approval15 (17) · 20%

Unsure3 (5) · 6%

Q6.

In the Sunnyvale case, the opt-out denial appears to have been made administratively, not by an elected-board vote. If CUSD faced the same question, should it require a board vote?

86 answered

Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote43 (53) · 62%

No — administration should handle it under existing law16 (19) · 22%

Unsure8 (10) · 12%

Q7.

Any other thoughts on the political or religious issues school districts are facing?

Open-text question (see responses below).

Q8.

Which topics would you like addressed in future surveys?

Open-text question (see responses below).

Responses

Tip: use your browser's Find (Ctrl/⌘+F) to locate a verification code below.

Order: verification code · time | Comments: full · hidden

Verification code: 00c0895db14c9fdc442a85ffc75898dc (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Reserved to the elected board, decided in a public vote

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Verification code: 01fe3cec59609b9206738d3a020ab743 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: No

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: Somewhere in between / it depends — I think parents need to be made aware of more sensitive topics being introduced in class and offer ways to support discussions at home with children. Also, age should play a factor. Late elementary vs early may be a more appropriate time to introduce.

Q5: Administrators may act, but only with public board approval

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Q7: Honestly, even if parents opt out, students will likely get the missed info second-hand from their peers. In some cases, this info may be misconstrued or misdirected without proper guidance and delivery from a teacher.

Verification code: 060ef0920920dcfb20196f16343621d1 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: No

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: Not necessarily core curriculum but should be included

Q5: Unsure

Q6: Unsure

Q7: Inclusivity is not a religious issue, separation of church and state please

Verification code: 076efb27bfda6c74cc338fd28ac9a202 (Public) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: No

Q3: Yes

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Reserved to the elected board, decided in a public vote

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Q7: District should focus on teaching math, instead of confusing kids about sexual orientation before puberty.

Q8: Why many kids in the districts learn math outside of CUSD.

Verification code: 0b55511f2747aaa0e8f0142eaa26f9f7 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: This should not even be an issue. LGBTQ+-themed lessons should have no place in the curriculum, period, full stop. Recall the old saw; reading, writing, and arithmetic.

Q2: No, but is this an issue that means anything to us as parents. Tolerance of deviant and unnatural behavior and lifestyles can only go so far. Tolerance is one thing but indoctrination and grooming in the classroom should be eliminated without exception. Legal and economic considerations should be secondary considerations.

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Reserved to the elected board, decided in a public vote — Administrators are another step removed from responsibility to the parents. The elected Board is more responsive by virtue of their election.

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Q7: Education should exclude any current religious, current political, or current social(LGBTQQIP2SAA+) fads. Teach the children how to do the "three Rs" in life and let the parents instill their values as regards religion, politics, and lifestyle choices.

Q8: How can we reintroduce patriotism and love of country to the curriculum? Should Civics and American History be emphasized to a greater degree? At the high school level, should Shop, Personal Finance, and Career Counseling classes be reintroduced?

Verification code: 0d51c96c5b4609eb78acda959876c838 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: Yes

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Administrators may act, but only with public board approval

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Verification code: 0f1470b9d06e3b197b523fdf2820b5d2 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: No

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: Somewhere in between / it depends

Q5: Left to administrators, applying existing law

Q6: No — administration should handle it under existing law

Verification code: 11dfce899a96e8646ad2566cfe3b2d2e (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: No

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: LGBTQ+-inclusive instruction should be NOT a core cirriculum.

Q5: Reserved to the elected board, decided in a public vote

Q6: Unsure

Q7: 1st anendment grounds require government agencies to keep out of political or religious matters and that means not raising the topic in classrooms.

Verification code: 14f782d53ad81577cc7f504f85fc29a0 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: No

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Reserved to the elected board, decided in a public vote

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Q7: This decision should be made by the parents, period. We have a right to decide if our kids should learn such controversial topics or not. The administrators do not own our children!

Verification code: 16e344a8109f0d8b672aabf8d3be8f38 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: Yes

Q3: Yes

Q4: The Sunnyvale district's position — LGBTQ+-inclusive instruction is core curriculum under California law and should apply to all students, without an opt-out.

Q5: Left to administrators, applying existing law

Q6: No — administration should handle it under existing law

Q7: This is a complicated time legally, but educators must prioritize the safety and inclusion of LGBTQ students. There will always be loud anti-inclusion voices, but they do not represent our community. Public education is for all children, even those children that certain members of the community choose to demonize.

Verification code: 1922ec3487e60d533f20a17b021c1fec (Public) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: Yes

Q3: Yes

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Reserved to the elected board, decided in a public vote

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Q7: The parents should make decision for their kids’ education. The school should focus on academics. I have no issue of having kids learning human development. But gender alternation treatment should be approved by the parents. School should educate kids about the harm of socialism/ communism.

Verification code: 1943e9a0384e4a0abc037da92f625f05 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: No

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds. — Parents and families should always have the final decision on their children’s education and values.. full stop! This should be the schools default. Even when the districts values are not in alignment, you With so many people in the district from so many different countries in backgrounds, this should be expected and planned for. School should build systems to honor that sacred right and not in the schools interest or image.

Verification code: 23676a2759f7282692b9f49c3f3ae3cd (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: No

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Administrators may act, but only with public board approval

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Q7: none

Verification code: 26aaeb356c6dd8ff38496e3ad2d01dba (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: Yes

Q3: Yes

Q4: The Sunnyvale district's position — LGBTQ+-inclusive instruction is core curriculum under California law and should apply to all students, without an opt-out.

Q5: Left to administrators, applying existing law

Q6: No — administration should handle it under existing law

Q7: This is always a difficult and complex situation but until we operate otherwise the law is the law in the USA.

Verification code: 298a97cb48cdac886a18f41a35c78694 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Left to administrators, applying existing law

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Q7: Parents should be notified or at a minimum parents should be notified that they have to send a notification to be made aware of supplemental materials

Verification code: 33c343b4d7f0489af2c38af25de86be2 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: I believe parents should be allowed to opt-out regardless of religious grounds.

Q2: Unsure

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Administrators may act, but only with public board approval

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Verification code: 357347ab4ab520515e26d4b9a13adc5d (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: No

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Reserved to the elected board, decided in a public vote

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Verification code: 363015e4e3d75e3ccbe7a1947fabec90 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: Somewhere in between / it depends

Q5: Reserved to the elected board, decided in a public vote

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Q7: I think that it is important for students to be exposed to many differing viewpoints, issues, and opinions. Education should foster critical thinking for the student to decide for themselves what is right or wrong. If they are not exposed to multiple viewpoints, they can't make an informed decision. Parents who shield their children from opposing viewpoints are doing them a disservice.

Verification code: 38ef359fd89c662fbdbe435859eb92c4 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Unsure

Q2: No

Q3: Yes

Q4: It depends on the age of the child. I object to religious grounds on the basis that inclusivity is part of every religion, core beliefs that I know of. Opting out solidifies prejudices.

Q5: Reserved to the elected board, decided in a public vote

Q6: A public vote, including public hearings where the public can make their views heard.

Q7: Religious issues belong in the home, not the school. However, public policy issues are legitimate discussions.

Verification code: 3912445c5fe23dc6880e93749e6bf2bf (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: Yes

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Reserved to the elected board, decided in a public vote

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Q7: Please ask the public via surveys

Verification code: 39effa24253649f2647384241eed99ad (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Sunnyvale district's position — LGBTQ+-inclusive instruction is core curriculum under California law and should apply to all students, without an opt-out.

Q5: Left to administrators, applying existing law

Q6: No — administration should handle it under existing law

Verification code: 3b8a9b8cac81fae8d48c87bec72c2a40 (Public) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: No

Q3: No — Where and how do we request to be notified? The district should send out a notice and link for this. They are intentionally making it harder.

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Administrators may act, but only with public board approval

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Q7: I feel like the district is not in true partnership with parents when they are sneaky like this. Be transparent. These are OUR CHILDREN.

Verification code: 3bce354325052609ba47ec7199f77c9b (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: No

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: Somewhere in between / it depends

Q5: Reserved to the elected board, decided in a public vote

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Verification code: 3c61d8d9370fe70bd682f687fae2214b (Public) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Reserved to the elected board, decided in a public vote

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Verification code: 3e55d10e7f14741cc9b9cd9aa26bf7b1 (Public) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: Yes

Q3: Yes

Q4: The Sunnyvale district's position — LGBTQ+-inclusive instruction is core curriculum under California law and should apply to all students, without an opt-out. — You cannot opt out of learning about identities of the people you go to school with.

Q5: Left to administrators, applying existing law — Board policies guide admin and BPs and ARs supersede Ed Code. Boards approve attorneys advising admin on how to follow the law.

Q6: No — administration should handle it under existing law — SSD admin follows Board policy and legal advice of attorneys approved by the SSD Board. Boards hire the Superintendent and rely on the Supt. to run the District. It is not feasible to have the Board hold a public notice on every decision—there’s not time. If the Board doesn’t like it, they fire the Supt.

Q7: How is CUSD protecting students, employees and parents from ICE?

Q8: School safety: How come the kid who tears apart my child’s classroom, interrupting learning and making everyone afraid, is still coming to campus every day, and why doesn’t my teacher have help with that?

Verification code: 43839f1e0ce836d7244673e2952e30bb (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Unsure

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: Unsure

Q5: Reserved to the elected board, decided in a public vote

Q6: Unsure

Verification code: 449e198128197fc8d1cacdac300f5229 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: Yes

Q3: Yes

Q4: The Sunnyvale district's position — LGBTQ+-inclusive instruction is core curriculum under California law and should apply to all students, without an opt-out.

Q5: Reserved to the elected board, decided in a public vote

Q6: Unsure

Verification code: 4523d548198599044e5e78bc120cfb33 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: No

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Reserved to the elected board, decided in a public vote

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Verification code: 45aec4edfd43a379be1c7c56a8640147 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: Yes

Q3: Yes

Q4: The Sunnyvale district's position — LGBTQ+-inclusive instruction is core curriculum under California law and should apply to all students, without an opt-out.

Q5: Members of the district, not the administrators

Q6: No — administration should handle it under existing law — Legal basis for you to send out these surveys?

Q7: LGBTQ Rights are human rights and not a religious discussion point. Legal

Verification code: 495785c97a59a2b01778537f897bb530 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: No

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Sunnyvale district's position — LGBTQ+-inclusive instruction is core curriculum under California law and should apply to all students, without an opt-out.

Q5: Left to administrators, applying existing law

Q6: No — administration should handle it under existing law

Q7: The reality is that there people who are LGBTQ+. It should be something hidden. Talking about these lifestyles is the only way to defuse the prejudices against these people. It should be done in accordance with current laws. Parents are free to discuss with their children how the classroom points fit in or don’t with their religion. I think it is good that it should prompt such discussions. It’s time we let these people live with dignity.

Q8: How to deal with declining enrollments.

Verification code: 4d5bc88833a44dbbb7b7bc652146c87f (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: No

Q2: No

Q3: No

Verification code: 53567e7f5988ff716c359396dd3b8590 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: Yes

Q3: Yes

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Reserved to the elected board, decided in a public vote

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Q7: the state mandate is wrong, devisive, removes the freedom of choice and must be ended and those who required the mandate removed from their position or public office

Verification code: 540817aa134e6a7cddc643abc5141abc (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: No

Q2: No

Q3: No

Verification code: 544d41a45eb23e70a1737ed748c27fd1 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: No

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Reserved to the elected board, decided in a public vote

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Q7: School District should have hearing with the parents regarding any policy change before making any decisions.

Verification code: 55766a1a9d3b3e245a6cb6202f877726 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: No

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Administrators may act, but only with public board approval

Q6: No — administration should handle it under existing law

Verification code: 585dc710734dd4cf65cf5e33ee7ec5fc (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Reserved to the elected board, decided in a public vote

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Verification code: 58bd1382cfbf31ee432fe7a4cab4877b (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: No

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Administrators may act, but only with public board approval

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Verification code: 5958a49a410c6ab1a84eee7348b82536 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: No

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Sunnyvale district's position — LGBTQ+-inclusive instruction is core curriculum under California law and should apply to all students, without an opt-out.

Q5: Administrators may act, but only with public board approval

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Q7: No one should "opt out" of tolerance.

Q8: Whether or not we should disallow construction of Data Centers and/or demolish those already built.

Verification code: 5a068235f6381ff7ed46178523a008d3 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: No

Q3: Yes

Q4: The Sunnyvale district's position — LGBTQ+-inclusive instruction is core curriculum under California law and should apply to all students, without an opt-out.

Q5: Left to administrators, applying existing law

Q6: No — administration should handle it under existing law

Verification code: 5d393532efc3ed0df4c4ab4405101ef8 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: Yes

Q3: Yes

Q4: The Sunnyvale district's position — LGBTQ+-inclusive instruction is core curriculum under California law and should apply to all students, without an opt-out.

Q5: Unsure

Q6: Unsure

Q7: Religion is a thinly veiled facade justifying bigotry and discrimination. The entire concept being gay or queer being about morality is misguided and closed minded. Do not support the loud and vocal minority of bigots and homophobes who hide behind their church in order to justify their hate. Children should be taught inclusively about everyone in the community.

Verification code: 5eef8555e7e56f0affd26e61fd72c7a8 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Reserved to the elected board, decided in a public vote

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Verification code: 60d576ddd42b59512a1bf79309411425 (Public) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Sunnyvale district's position — LGBTQ+-inclusive instruction is core curriculum under California law and should apply to all students, without an opt-out.

Q5: Left to administrators, applying existing law

Q6: No — administration should handle it under existing law

Q7: Inclusion and anti-bullying standards must apply to all students without exception. Allowing opt-outs for LGBTQIA+ materials undermines our commitment to creating a safe, respectful, and complete learning environment for everyone.

Verification code: 62550f9bc617edb6067b3f6ee99f0f4f (Public) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Reserved to the elected board, decided in a public vote

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Verification code: 62bdd5bb9dede19873065f8ad826cc6d (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: No

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Reserved to the elected board, decided in a public vote

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Verification code: 6462eff581c3b03f1ccc1dc4fd4a029c (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Transparency is most important. Any such decisions must be informed to public, and the public has the means, such as public vote or public board approval, if requested.

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Q7: Transparency is a must above all. Public has the right to know, to veto if necessary. Practically, administrators can make decisions administratively, but must be subject to public monitoring and final approval or disapproval.

Q8: Teach kids the skills for critical thinking on such complex issues, but must be taught to criticize both opposite sides of the views.

Verification code: 64954aff81975ae26c6498fd51d9c8b5 (Public) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Reserved to the elected board, decided in a public vote

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Verification code: 6b602a2bdf2e04647626a92148978db7 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes — You should not be able to opt out of someone’s identity. It was not long ago that so called Christians were opting out of racially integrated classrooms…

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Sunnyvale district's position — LGBTQ+-inclusive instruction is core curriculum under California law and should apply to all students, without an opt-out. — Parents should not get to opt out of curricula because they do not believe in someone’s identity.

Q5: Left to administrators, applying existing law

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Verification code: 6ffe2c8ffdade95625cf79ab0566d848 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: Yes

Q3: Yes

Q4: I agree that parents should initiate the request to opt out if they have strong religious beliefs within the first 10 days of school. It is not necessary to notify the whole class every single time the teacher reads an inclusive story.

Q5: Left to administrators, applying existing law

Q6: No — administration should handle it under existing law

Q7: All children, students and families should feel safe, represented and valued in their classrooms. Exposure to diversity is not dictating how an individual should live. It is acknowledging and embracing our differences in a respectful manner.

Verification code: 747141599f9be70135fb4985a3035a2d (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Reserved to the elected board, decided in a public vote

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Verification code: 7600472f92557b07ea0d7212e6f5c158 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Reserved to the elected board, decided in a public vote

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Q7: It is uneceptable for schools to force such things automatically to please a very small population. School should concentrate on education instead of such progressive, LGBT like etc. and keep parents uninformed

Q8: Any such gender change related, progresism, LGBT agenda and anything that has to do with school transitioning from beeing a classsic consetvative school and move towards anything else.

Verification code: 765574e81a899905399ea8e9ea697b9f (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Administrators may act, but only with public board approval

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Verification code: 7eb088ddadcc0dbe5c93ceccb03e9faa (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Administrators may act, but only with public board approval

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Verification code: 80ab412f39a5b05c9e8e0fd6c2d5d37b (Public) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Administrators may act, but only with public board approval

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Verification code: 824a0a586b47166622aaf56703bea2c1 (Public) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Sunnyvale district's position — LGBTQ+-inclusive instruction is core curriculum under California law and should apply to all students, without an opt-out.

Q5: Left to administrators, applying existing law

Q6: No — administration should handle it under existing law

Verification code: 87212eea44f8ead305eeab1e20c825d3 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Sunnyvale district's position — LGBTQ+-inclusive instruction is core curriculum under California law and should apply to all students, without an opt-out.

Q5: Unsure

Q6: Unsure

Q7: Not in particular, so I'll instead offer my piece on this topic: I believe kids should be taught that queer folk exist. I believe queer students should be acknowledged instead of ostracised. The purpose of social studies is to equip students with historical and societal knowledge to analyze/make connections with their community, and I believe no child should be denied the opportunity. Inclusive lessons also serve to create a more welcoming environment at school, which improves academic performance for all

Q8: Budgeting, food insecurity, bullying prevention, mandated reporting

Verification code: 89ee10e2a470ed7236ff87d8fa06c72d (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Administrators may act, but should allow board to reject.

Q6: Unsure

Q7: I don't understand,. Does that mean the CA's law does not fall under The Superme court's 1st Amendament ruling? Any law violates constitution should be thrown out.

Verification code: 904a0662c1d7a24173b93f577fd82a31 (Public) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: Yes

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: The option to opt-out should always be applied, whether it's LGBTQ or forcing participation at the recent Palo Alto school field trip to the mosque

Q6: It should not solely be handled by administration. Parents should have input, but most are too busy to follow elected board votes.

Verification code: 95a73816e06c4611a2b2f029506e9432 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: No

Q2: No

Q3: No

Verification code: 964af5cf5e21efa63625d3d2ec3a0178 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: No

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Reserved to the elected board, decided in a public vote

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Verification code: 966647ffe31be969d9ebd40869f41147 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: Yes

Q3: Yes

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Administrators may act, but only with public board approval

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Q7: The matter of LQBTQ inclusivity being core cirriculum.

Verification code: 971e92a3deed2b816313c63cee80cbf4 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q4: The Sunnyvale district's position — LGBTQ+-inclusive instruction is core curriculum under California law and should apply to all students, without an opt-out.

Q5: Left to administrators, applying existing law

Q6: No — administration should handle it under existing law

Q8: It is clear I do not agree with your position.

Verification code: 9ab22b2113a6e941334f8e2f5b45b547 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: No

Q2: No

Q3: Yes

Q4: The Sunnyvale district's position — LGBTQ+-inclusive instruction is core curriculum under California law and should apply to all students, without an opt-out.

Q5: Left to administrators, applying existing law

Q6: No — administration should handle it under existing law

Q7: As a society, we should not be catering to religious extremists. A solid public education is a well-rounded education that prepares its students for life. It’s absurd that uniformed biased and religious extremist who want to keep their children ignorant are allowed to dictate pubic education policy. Defer to the experts in all cases of public education. Period.

Verification code: 9e6504a3523dc5b99eae56079bea967a (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Reserved to the elected board, decided in a public vote

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Q7: A parent is the authority that determines what their children are taught in regards to things that are controversial to religious beliefs. As a child my parents pulled me from certain science class segments when we discussed diseases and transmission based on their religious beliefs. I don't see any reason why a school board should be able to step in and make a ruling that a child must be taught something in direct opposition to the parents belief.

Verification code: a141a6ae7acfe182d0d50652a4ee61f1 (Public) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: No — Shameful

Q3: No — Appears they’re trying to bypass the law

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Reserved to the elected board, decided in a public vote

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Verification code: a351beadfd7838189958e9bef9322717 (Public) · 2026-08-29

Q1: No

Q2: Yes

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Unsure

Q6: Unsure

Q7: Parents should have the right to opt out of curriculum based on religious reasons, and the entire class should be notified when questionable content like LGBTQ is being presented. Parents should also be able to opt out of Chromebooks and EdTech, which is shortening attention spans, enabling kids to access dangerous or harmful content, and addicting kids to screens

Q8: the right to opt out of Chromebooks and Edtech;

Verification code: a429d282a28b694d2bd6bf5d0bd04e32 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: No

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Sunnyvale district's position — LGBTQ+-inclusive instruction is core curriculum under California law and should apply to all students, without an opt-out.

Q5: Administrators should generally be able to act, as they can best deem, in accordance with the existing law - but this would not mean that the board should not get a say.

Q6: From a legal/government standpoint, I think both executive and legislative (or whatever their versions are) should be cooperating and finding ways to compromise. Practically speaking, I think this issue is such a small deal--no one's trying to convince more kids to be gay. It's hard enough to be gay already.

Verification code: a625501c71c8a948b658b1f94cbfe1b9 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Reserved to the elected board, decided in a public vote

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Verification code: a91df93673994fddb1b34ee74cd3b6c4 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Administrators may act, but only with public board approval

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Verification code: affc93598cb183458df224fcd77ab58b (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Reserved to the elected board, decided in a public vote

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Q7: Policies should default to transparency and deferring to parents as the sole authority of their child's education, not defaulting to school deciding what is better for the child

Q8: Financial and budget health of school system given declining child population

Verification code: b0c8dd64f7342b3687eafdf2d84dec5f (Public) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Sunnyvale district's position — LGBTQ+-inclusive instruction is core curriculum under California law and should apply to all students, without an opt-out.

Q5: Unsure

Q6: Unsure

Q7: I disagree with the Supreme Court ruling. Kids should have representation in their materials at school.

Verification code: b684e20e50096135bd828fc712475858 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Reserved to the elected board, decided in a public vote

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Verification code: b6ecec65fb5b4a072780c270c5165936 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: Yes

Q3: Yes

Q4: The Sunnyvale district's position — LGBTQ+-inclusive instruction is core curriculum under California law and should apply to all students, without an opt-out.

Q5: LGBTQ people are a fact of life, and laws can not make them cease to exist.

Q6: Just because complaints are loud does not make them valid.

Verification code: b8c995f7f6620cf268ee26293269c3dc (Public) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Reserved to the elected board, decided in a public vote

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Verification code: b9d8a0b12f8f7e341e5d4836129620e5 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: No

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Reserved to the elected board, decided in a public vote

Q6: Unsure

Verification code: ba11a47c99841730a61bbc8576ed3d2b (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: No

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Left to administrators, applying existing law

Q6: No — administration should handle it under existing law

Verification code: bac9a6e5b32b5a13e835e49b944a0368 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Sunnyvale district's position — LGBTQ+-inclusive instruction is core curriculum under California law and should apply to all students, without an opt-out.

Q5: Left to administrators, applying existing law

Q6: No — administration should handle it under existing law

Q7: The existence of LGBTQ+ people is a fact. By allowing parents to opt children out of any mention of their existence stigmatizes and demonizes LGBTQ people and sends the message to children who belong to or have loved ones who belong to that group that their very existence is wrong. That type of opt out of the mention of a group would never be allowed for the mention of religious groups, racial groups, etc. Our district should not support opt outs for material that just mentions someone is gay (like history)

Verification code: beafe99583b319010ae9f9566bc74cce (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: This is a sensible ruling. We parent sending our kids to school did not relinquish our judgement on what to be taught to our kids.

Q2: The SVL School District has always be extremely left leaning. CUSD should not be the same.

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Reserved to the elected board, decided in a public vote

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Q7: The board need to be decisive when come to the appointment of the superintendent. If the district is not listening to the elective board, the superintendent should be terminated without hesitation.

Q8: School closure decisions

Verification code: c54ea8e0f3d973197cc0b60deb0df0e5 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: No

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Administrators may act, but only with public board approval

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Verification code: cca233bc67fa9a5ad0cc03991d0c938b (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: No

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Sunnyvale district's position — LGBTQ+-inclusive instruction is core curriculum under California law and should apply to all students, without an opt-out.

Q5: Left to administrators, applying existing law

Q6: No — administration should handle it under existing law

Q7: I'm agnostic. I believe all people should learn about their bodies and humanity, including LGBTQIA+ humans. California should not be putting body-illiterate people into the world. I got all my classes not even knowing there was an option. I'm glad I got the education I did.

Verification code: cdcbcfc09d2bd8ca8ab1182e8e33dfe1 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: Yes

Q3: Yes

Q4: The Sunnyvale district's position — LGBTQ+-inclusive instruction is core curriculum under California law and should apply to all students, without an opt-out. — fear breeds ignorance and bigotry. Parents who fear LGBTQ+ curriculum are fearful, ignorant and bigoted

Q5: Left to administrators, applying existing law — based on history, board members do not always serve the best interest of students and instead focus on their own biases

Q6: No — administration should handle it under existing law — based on history, board mebers do not always serve the best interest of students and instead focus on their own biases

Q7: religion does not belong on the classroom. Under this nation's current Department of Ed, we need to be more diligent about keeping religiom out of the classroom

Q8: comprehensive sex education; writing instruction: it has declined after Lucy Caulkins curriculum and still hasn't recovered

Verification code: d15c1303d56b0f0d156f96c676dfe19f (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds. — Parents should ALWAYS be allowed to raise their children, NOT the schools or the Government.

Q5: Administrators may act, but only with public board approval

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote — If CUSD does not follow our country's laws, they should all be replaced.

Q7: Please allow parents to raise their own kids, UNLESS their beliefs and practices can hurt other students or faculty.

Q8: Budget problems and how our district is handling them.

Verification code: d17a0b73130f0db7c3ad19e9e83d0701 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Reserved to the elected board, decided in a public vote

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Q7: Parents should have full voting rights on what their kids are taught across the board

Verification code: d65d65c21fd5e107f4c3108ab529d2f3 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: No

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Reserved to the elected board, decided in a public vote

Q6: No — administration should handle it under existing law

Q7: I would allow my child to see/be taught just about anything but I do want to be notified.

Verification code: db0ac3f586c831730575fb9f74b2edc6 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Unsure

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Reserved to the elected board, decided in a public vote

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Verification code: e240aa9f5f321407810a859909e95b0a (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: Yes

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Reserved to the elected board, decided in a public vote

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Q7: I believe very strongly that all parents should be notified and given the opportunity to opt there child out of the class

Verification code: e2defa27dcf625468c0be5d555df6c3f (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: Yes

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Reserved to the elected board, decided in a public vote

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Verification code: e3d915b6b8abeedd7d662d5edd31b1e8 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: No

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The curriculum needs to be updated to make sure that consistent tolerance of everyone is the message. A variety of books should be available. Nobody should be allowed to opt out of tolerance.

Q5: Administrators may act, but only with public board approval

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Verification code: e9e62b1104b1402e8c0fd27865a65020 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: No

Q2: No

Q3: No

Verification code: f4358bec2da211936e8514d0714759d5 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Yes

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Reserved to the elected board, decided in a public vote

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Q7: Parents have a right to know and their consent should be obtained.

Verification code: f651f2f157fa76a6d33c0494a96480d2 (Verified voter) · 2026-08-29

Q1: No

Q2: No

Q3: No

Q4: Somewhere in between / it depends

Q5: Administrators may act, but only with public board approval

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote

Verification code: f822eb81f25fdab529ddf96b5030088b (Public) · 2026-08-29

Q1: Unsure

Q2: Unsure

Q3: No

Q4: The Supreme Court's position — parents should get notice and be able to opt their child out of LGBTQ+-themed lessons/books on religious grounds.

Q5: Reserved to the elected board, decided in a public vote

Q6: Yes — a decision like this should require an elected-board vote