Non-Binary Teacher Cites Personal Safety Concerns to Avoid Director's Child, Sparking Legal Action
Tension erupts as Tumwater School Board Director Casey Taylor's tort claim against the district is exposed during public board meeting
The first Tumwater school board meeting following November’s contentious election, was tense to say the least. The newly seated board now appears to be split 3-2, and that divide is palpable.
Routine vote turns ugly
What should have been a routine procedural vote for who will preside as the board president veered way off course when Casey Taylor’s nomination for the position resulted in Melissa Beard and Julie Watts confronting Taylor about a tort claim he’s filed against the district.
The confrontation was raised publicly from the dais rather than handled in executive session, where legal matters are normally discussed…and it appeared coordinated.
It also raised immediate questions about who had access to Taylor’s complaint and why only two directors had been briefed.
How we got here: the February vote
To understand the context, we need to revisit February 2025 when Directors Darby Kaikkonen, Casey Taylor, and Ty Kuehl voted to support a resolution affirming that girls’ athletics should be based on biological sex.
The consequences for those directors were swift and severe.
Director Kaikkonen was terminated from her OSPI job within days of the vote (covered here: Tumwater Board Director Fired from OSPI for Defending Female Sports).
Months of vitriolic backlash also followed (covered here: Does Biology Matter).
The teachers unions, WEA, TEA, and Thurston County Democrats pledged to overturn the board in November and backed candidates committed to reversing the resolution.
A child caught in the crossfire
By late spring, the conflict took a deeply personal turn for Director Casey Taylor. According to his wife, she had allegedly been told by their son’s principal that a 5th grade teacher did not want to have Taylor’s son placed in their class for the next school year.
Disturbed by what the Taylor’s viewed as blatant discrimination of their ten-year-old son, they withdrew him from Tumwater schools entirely for his well-being.
In August, Taylor filed a formal misconduct complaint against the teacher—TJ Thornton who goes by Mx. instead of Mr. or Ms., claims non-binary identity status, and uses they/them pronouns.
The district hired an outside firm to investigate the complaint.
During the investigation it was revealed that yes, Thornton did indeed go to the principal with concerns about having Casey Taylor’s son in their class, citing fear for their personal safety.
According to the investigator’s September 24, 2025 report:
“Mx. Thornton told me they had talked to (the principal) about their concern regarding their safety with the placement of students with parents who do not support people who are nonbinary…their concern was that Mr. Taylor may have “some transphobia” because he did not support transgender athletes. They also said they had requested a meeting with (the principal) to discuss developing a policy or practice to help mitigate the placement of students in their class who come from families that do not support LGBTQIA+ identities. They stated that their request was centered on their safety and an effort to prevent future harassment.”
Despite what appears to be a full admission that Thornton sought to avoid having the student in their classroom based on the perceived personal beliefs of the child’s parent, the investigator deemed the allegations unsubstantiated:
“This allegation is unsubstantiated because I could not substantiate that Mx. Thornton said they could not teach (student) because of different political views. Mx. Thornton did share her concerns with her peers and supervisors about not feeling safe and having possible negative parental interactions with the Taylors because of Mr. Taylor’s action on the school board. Mx. Thornton’s concerns were based on previous negative experiences with parents in general. Mx. Thornton indicated they were afraid that future parent teacher interactions with Mr. Taylor would be negative based on actions he had taken regarding transgender athletes while on the school board. Mx. Thornton did not go to the fourth-grade teachers to try and influence where (student) was ultimately placed for fifth grade, but the fourth-grade teachers were aware of the issue and opted not to place (student) in Mx. Thornton’s class.
Tort claim filed
On November 30, Taylor filed a new formal complaint with HR and the superintendent, this time naming both the district and the teacher.
The complaint alleges:
Discrimination against (student) on the basis of familial status and perceived political ideology
Improper influence of the elementary class-placement process for personal gain
Request for a discriminatory policy allowing exclusion of student whose families are perceived unsupportive of LGBTQIA+ identities
Misuse of protected non-binary identity as a pretext to exclude student
Misrepresentation or material exaggeration of prior parent harassment during the Clear Risk Investigation
Maintaining no written policy for elementary class placement despite actual knowledge of parental distrust since 2023
Failure to require substantiation of Thornton’s safety claims
Retaliation against School Board Member Casey Taylor and family
Absence of mandatory training on nondiscrimination in student placement
A tort claim was also issued for 1.15M based on the costs of private tuition fees, emotional distress for both child and parents, and retaliatory actions made against Taylor.
Conflict of interest?
When questions were raised by Director Beard regarding a conflict of interest, Taylor referenced policy 1610:
The conflict of interest rules focus on outgoing benefits such as an officer benefitting from contracts with the district.
Filing a tort claim against a school district, as a prerequisite to any lawsuit for damages, does not inherently create a conflict of interest. Tort claims are a statutory right available to any individual, including a board director harmed by a school district.
With that said, Taylor would, at minimum, be required to recuse himself from any board discussion, decisions, or action related to his own case and possibly more.
Transparency will be essential for maintaining public trust in the process, particularly given the highly public manner in which this issue was raised.
Questions surround information release
How the information surfaced is also troubling.
The superintendent reportedly sent the complaint to WEA, but not to any board directors, yet Beard and Watts appeared fully briefed and prepared to confront Taylor publicly.
Compounding this concern, DJ Brimer, president of the Tumwater Teachers Union, was reportedly discussing the tort claim well before the board meeting when it was revealed publicly.
The pattern raises questions about whether confidential information was selectively shared for political or strategic purposes.
In a scathing rebuke of Watts and Beard, Taylor gave the following remarks in which he lambasted them both for hiring a convicted child rapist to work on their campaigns for school board.
Unstable moment for the district
Director Taylor now finds himself in a precarious position. He is a duly elected board member, a graduate of Tumwater schools, and someone with a clear affinity for the district, yet his own child no longer feels safe attending that same system.
There is precedent: in Kent School District v. Cook (2024–2025), a sitting school board director successfully sued their district while retaining their position.
Tumwater may soon face its own test case.