The Clark County School District will move forward crafting a controversial gender-diverse policy — setting the stage for more public showdowns over an issue that has divided the community.

After a six-hour meeting Thursday night, the School Board of Trustees voted 4-3 to direct district staff to create a policy that would offer principals more guidance on how to address the needs of transgender students.

The decision capped months of debate over the controversial issue, but it’s far from the end of it. The board must approve any future draft policy brought forward, which will involve more public meetings and conversations.

Dozens of parents and community members showed up to the Clark County Government Center, where the meeting was held to accommodate the large crowd, and testified during the public comment period. Their testimony highlighted the tug-of-war at play as the district tries to balance protecting all students and preserving parental rights.

Sandy Johnson walked to the podium Thursday evening with her 14-year-old transgender daughter, Cameron, beside her. Johnson said her child isn’t looking to assault girls in the bathroom once gaining access — a common safety concern shared by opponents of the policy.

Instead, Johnson urged the board to move forward with a policy that would protect her transgender daughter, whom she said has been assaulted twice at school.

“It was the relief for her to finally be the girl she was born,” Johnson said of her daughter’s transition.

But many parents who testified against the policy criticized the process and said they feared a policy would be adopted without their thoughts taken into consideration.

“I urge you to consider the privacy of all children and not just a small minority,” MaryAnn Dillard, a mother of three, said. “I absolutely feel that transgender individuals should feel safe, but so should every child. I urge you to listen to the voice of the parents that have turned up in great numbers.”

The crowd appeared fairly evenly split — half in favor of developing a policy and half opposed — based on the number of people who stood while showing their support for various public comments. The board allowed one minute of testimony per every person who wished to speak.

The trustees also heard from one principal — Jonathan Synold from Advanced Technologies Academy — who said school-based administrators desire a policy that guides how they accommodate and protect all students in a consistent manner. Synold said the principals don’t necessarily support one policy in particular, but he noted that the Washoe County School District enacted a gender-diverse policy three years ago without any “horror stories” since then.

“Something needs to be done, and it needs to be done quickly,” he said.

Like the community, the board was also divided over the issue. Trustees Deanna Wright, Carolyn Edwards, Lola Brooks and Linda Cavazos supported the motion to begin developing a gender-diverse policy. Trustees Linda Young, Chris Garvey and Kevin Child opposed it.

Garvey favored adopting guidelines rather than a policy, partially because the Nevada Department of Education has not yet formed a statewide gender-diverse policy.

Senate Bill 225 requires the state to provide a regulation that ensures a safe and respectful learning environment for students with diverse gender identities and expressions. The state education department, however, has expressed a willingness to collaborate with the school district as it creates a local policy.

“I really think that going forward with a policy at this time before we have that guidance from the state is not going to be as effective as some of the other board members think,” Garvey said.

The quartet of trustees who supported the motion didn’t see a need to wait. In fact, Cavazos choked up as she described how stalling because of lawsuit threats could endanger vulnerable students’ lives.

“One child’s life is not worth that,” she said amid tears. “You can bring 100 lawsuits and that is not worth one child dying. That’s all I have to say.”

Brooks, meanwhile, delivered strong words to those who suggested the board wasn’t listening to constituents. She reminded the crowd that “the county overwhelmingly did not vote for Donald Trump.”

“Some of the things I’ve heard in this room make me feel that some people fundamentally misunderstand transgender students and demonize them,” she said.

Trustees assured attendees that parents and community members would be involved in the policy-development process. The timeline for that process wasn’t immediately clear.

Edwards first suggested the district form a working group to look into a gender-diverse policy back in June. That group spent months examining policies from other districts and developing recommendations about what topics should be addressed in any forthcoming policy. Restroom access, privacy and disclosure, names and pronouns and overnight field trips were among the topics recommended for inclusion.

The board postponed making any decision on whether to even craft a policy several times. Space constraints and concerns about Open Meeting Law violations forced trustees to pull the agenda item from a meeting last month, hence the larger venue and unlimited public comment period this week.