In 1998, primary plaintiff Alana Flores and five other district students filed a lawsuit against the Morgan Hill Unified School District for damages and improved training for personnel and students. They say ongoing harassment of students presumed to be gay went unpunished by school officials. The district settled in the U.S. Court of Appeals in 2004, agreeing to train staff and students and paying the six students $1.1 million total.

The district implemented the "Sexual Orientation/Gender Identity" program in 2006/07, giving one to two hours of staff training on the rights of persons of all sexual orientations. Additionally, seventh and ninth graders received a 45-minute lesson on antidiscrimination.

Now that the settlement mandate has ended, the district does not have to give an annual report to the ACLU and won't train seventh and ninth graders, but administrators at each school will highlight the page in the student handbook that discusses gender discrimination, Totter said.

The district also monitored incidences of discrimination based on sexual orientation. During the 2008/09 school year, 214 incidences were reported, up 33 percent over last year's 161, according to district documents. Assistant Superintendent of Human Resources Jay Totter said that the district assumed there would be some increase since the district had 150 new students this year, about a 1.7 percent increase over last year.

Board President Don Moody said he believed the uptick in incidences didn't mean more discrimination was happening, but that "schools are more sensitive to it and reporting every little thing that comes up."

There are two categories of SO/GI incidents: Pattern 1 is when a student uses the word "gay" inappropriately, as in "This spelling test is gay."

Pattern 2 is everything else, from using words like "queer" in a hurtful or intimidating way to physical violence. Of the 214 incidences last year, 91 were Pattern 2, according to district documents.

"The goal is not to eliminate SO/GI discrimination, but we can contain and respond to it in an appropriate fashion. I don't believe it's a realistic goal to eliminate it," Totter said.

The required training and monitoring portion of the settlement ends Tuesday and the court will review and update the district if it needs to do anything else, Totter said. So far, gay students gave mixed reviews. Today, gay students seem OK with being "out" on campus. According to them, the district has achieved its goal: they feel safe.

"People aren't going to beat up on you or give you a hard time because (administrators) are there to protect you," said 2009 Ann Sobrato High School graduate Brooke Martin. "But as far as being accepted, I don't think administration has anything to do with it."

Martin contended that she was still discriminated against. "I actually had a teacher tell my ex-girlfriend that we had to cool off the (public displays of affection) at school," she said. "And we would be doing way less (than straight couples). Some are all way up on themselves at the lockers, and we would just kiss here and there and it's all of a sudden a big deal."

This past school year was especially tense for gay students, given the frequent classroom conversations on Proposition 8, which passed in November and changed the California constitution to define marriage as between a man and a woman only.

"There were students objecting to it, and they know you're gay," Martin said. "I couldn't help but take it personally sometimes."

A Sobrato junior who did not wish to be named said the SO/GI program worked, but only for students willing to listen.

"I feel a little more safe I guess, but it's still kind of awkward," he said, adding that he wasn't really sure what more administrators could do.

John Glass, who taught English at Live Oak High School for eight years and recently advised for the Gay Straight Alliance there, pointed out that 70 percent of students there voted against the proposition in their mock election.

"I think that is reflective there. I'm not saying the atmosphere at Live Oak is perfect, but it is reflective of a shift in attitude," he said.

Glass said the school has made progress in the eight years he taught there.

"Part of that is our society, and our culture, not just necessarily the SO/GI training."

Now, the court will analyze the district's progress and follow up with future steps that might need to be taken, Totter said.

The testifying students in the original case said that, between 1991 and 1998, school district employees at Live Oak High School, Britton and Martin Murphy middle schools repeatedly ignored or minimized many reports by the students that they were being abused by others who thought they were gay.

The students said they often heard anti-gay epithets such as "die dyke," "faggot," and "queer." They were confronted with pornographic images in the lunchroom or left in their lockers. One student, Freddie Fuentes, said he was hospitalized as a seventh grader after a brutal bus-stop beating during which he was called "faggot." Fuentes said when the bus pulled up, the driver allowed the assailants on board and left him lying on the ground.

The district never admitted guilt in any of these incidences and settled with the students in 2004.

The case received national attention. It's now considered a landmark case by gay rights activists because of one ruling: School districts are obligated to take meaningful steps to end known anti-gay harassment and to protect students, and that districts could be sued if they do not, according to the court.

The program is now a cornerstone in the district's larger anti-bullying and safe schools campaign, Totter said.

Trustees agreed that the programs were not about gay rights, but about ensuring a safe learning environment for all students.