One Pennsylvania county has decided to bow the knee to a teeny-tiny minority of mentally ill people and send the bill of $2.4 million to taxpayers to transform gender-specific locker rooms in the Eastern Lancaster County School District to gender-neutral facilities instead.

Fox 29 reported, “Board members unanimously passed policy 253 on Monday night, the first student day of the 2019-2020 school year.”

According to Lancaster Online:

The design includes four “zones” with a combined 48 private changing rooms and 76 private showers, Hollister said. Each of the showers can also be used to change, so that makes 124 total changing areas.

The four quadrants, which were purposely designed as openly as possible for safety and security reasons, won’t be designated by gender, Hollister said, “although I think there will be a natural selection,” he added.

Garden Spot locker room design by LancasterOnline on Scribd

A natural selection?  What is that supposed to mean?  Somehow, I think what they are promoting is not natural by caving into the entire “gender-neutral” nonsense.

However, privacy for kids should have always been a concern.  I never thought it was appropriate for bathroom stalls and showers to be open, even if it was the same gender.

However, note that it will be taxpayers on the hook for this politically correct version of locker rooms.

“An initial cost estimate was $1 million, but the cost climbed as the district added more plumbing and square footage, Hollister said. It also tacked on a heating and ventilation upgrade, he said,” Lancaster Online reported.

However, the total cost estimates are now $2.4 million!  That’s $1.4 million more than the previous estimate.

I’m pretty sure I could contract that job myself at roughly half the cost.  I’ll bet several in the reading audience could do it as well.

“This District policy states that multi-user locker rooms and restrooms will be separated based on biological sex. But the idea behind the policy is much deeper,” the board wrote in a statement. “We’ve worked hard to arrive at a solution that balances varied interests – which is why we’re systematically converting multi-user facilities into a series of single-user facilities.”

“ELANCO prides itself in not simply providing reasonable accommodations to those who need them, but going above and beyond to provide extraordinary accommodations for all its students,” the board wrote.

Oh, I’ll say… to the tune of $2.4 million!  And reasonable?  Why can’t the current facility just have stall doors installed on the showers?  Why can’t they simply knock a wall out, pour some cement, tile it and add on space at a fraction of the cost of the bill they will hit taxpayers up with?  Why isn’t anyone asking these questions?

Furthermore, why are parents sending their kids to these indoctrination centers that look like prison sites instead of giving them a real education themselves?

Zero Hedge adds:

The restrooms only mark a first step in a “much larger inclusivity initiative” that will include specified classrooms for teams to meet during competition, when they would normally meet in a locker room. We’re sure those classrooms will smell terrific the next day. 

The rooms “will have entry points in public areas of schools so that any student, regardless of assigned sex and gender identity can access them.”

Also, athletes will no longer be able to change in these rooms. The Board stated: “Because nobody will change in any classroom, including these team classrooms, both sexes can be present. This really helps, for instance, when we have a girls’ team coached by a male, or vice versa.”

The initiative comes after backlash last year when the Board allowed a transgender boy to use the boys’ restroom and locker room during gym class. 

The Board said: “To be absolutely clear, we seek to accommodate any student in need of an accommodation because we believe accommodations can help all students to thrive. We also want to preserve bodily privacy in spaces that exist to provide privacy from those with the opposite anatomy. Some might say it’s an impossible task to balance all those interests. But it is one we’re working to implement.”

The Board concluded: “While this involves a significant investment. It is a worthwhile one that will serve students, coaches and the school well for many years to come.”

Really?  Is that what the taxpayers think?  Do they understand how this will effect their taxes, including immoral property taxes?  Is there no other option?  Or is this simply the best way the school district can justify a bigger budget next year and be politically correct at the same time?