1. Under what circumstances should a transgender person be limited to using facilities designated for their sex assigned at birth (e.g. a trans woman required to use a men’s restroom or locker room)?

I believe every person deserves to be treated with dignity and respect, including transgender residents in our community. No one should feel unsafe or unwelcome when accessing basic facilities.

At the same time, I recognize that questions around shared spaces like locker rooms can raise concerns for some families. My approach is to support policies that are thoughtful, clear, and guided by safety, privacy, and inclusion for everyone.

In most everyday settings, people should be able to use facilities that align with their gender identity. In more sensitive environments, such as locker rooms or situations involving minors, we should work collaboratively with schools, families, and community stakeholders to ensure reasonable privacy accommodations are available, such as private changing areas or single-user spaces, so that everyone feels comfortable and respected.

I believe we can move forward in a way that reduces conflict, respects individual dignity, and keeps our focus on building a community where everyone feels safe and supported.

2. Do you support protecting medical providers’ right to prescribe gender affirming care to transgender patients under 18 years old?

I believe families, patients, and qualified medical professionals should be able to make healthcare decisions together, guided by medical evidence, established standards of care, and the best interests of the child.

Gender-affirming care for minors is a complex and sensitive issue, and it’s important that any care provided is age-appropriate, evidence-based, and involves parental or guardian consent. Medical providers should be able to follow accepted clinical guidelines without undue political interference, while also ensuring strong safeguards, informed consent, and support for families navigating these decisions.

My focus is on making sure young people are safe, supported, and receiving care that is thoughtful, responsible, and grounded in medical expertise.

3. What limits, if any, should be placed on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives in county government?

I support Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion efforts that are focused on fairness, equal access, and effective service delivery for all residents.

In county government, DEI initiatives should be practical, transparent, and results-driven, helping ensure that everyone can access public services, participate in opportunities, and feel respected in their community. This includes things like language access, outreach to underserved communities, and fair hiring practices.

This is also the approach I’ve taken in my own work. As the founding president of the Chinese American Parent Association, I’ve worked to help immigrant families better navigate the school system and government resources so they can access the same opportunities as everyone else. We’ve also expanded programs that serve the broader community—like mentoring for low-income and ESOL students, STEM programs for girls, and support for families of children receiving special education services.

DEI efforts in government should be implemented thoughtfully and be regularly evaluated to ensure they are actually improving outcomes.

My focus is on what works, bringing people together, expanding opportunity, and delivering real, measurable benefits for residents across the county.

4. What restrictions should be placed on children’s content (books, videos, etc.) that refers to LGBTQ+ identities?

I believe children should have access to age-appropriate materials that reflect the diversity of our community and support their learning and well-being.

In public settings like schools and libraries, content should be selected through established, professional review processes that consider educational value and age appropriateness. Materials should be evaluated by educators and librarians using clear, consistent standards.

I do not support broad bans or censorship. When concerns arise, they should be addressed through transparent review processes that are thoughtful and grounded in professional judgment.

My approach is to uphold inclusion while maintaining clear, common-sense standards so that materials are appropriate, educational, and respectful of our diverse community.

5. What proof, if any, should a person transitioning from one gender to another need to in order to change government issued documents? Are there any circumstances when this should be forbidden?

I believe government processes should be clear, consistent, and respectful of individuals, while also maintaining the integrity of official records.

For updating gender markers on government-issued documents, there should be a straightforward and accessible process that allows individuals to make changes without unnecessary barriers. At the same time, it’s reasonable to have basic documentation requirements, such as a signed attestation or certification, so that records remain accurate and consistent across agencies. I do not believe this process should be arbitrarily restricted, but it should include safeguards to prevent fraud or misuse and ensure consistency across different forms of identification.

My focus is on making the process workable and respectful, while ensuring it is applied consistently and maintains public trust in official documents.

6. Do you approve of non-binary gender markers such as “X” instead of “M” or “F” on government documents? Why or why not?

I’m open to non-binary gender markers like “X” on government documents, as part of making our systems more respectful and responsive to the people they serve.

At the same time, any changes to official documents should be implemented carefully to ensure consistency across agencies and avoid unintended complications with identification, data systems, or interactions with federal requirements.

My approach is to be practical and thoughtful, supporting options that respect individuals while making sure our government systems remain clear, reliable, and easy to use for everyone.

7. Should a transgender child who wants to participate in athletics but is uncomfortable in a program for their sex assigned at birth be allowed to participate in a program for the gender they transitioned to? (e.g. a transgender girl who is uncomfortable playing on a boys’ team but who wants to take part in sports).

I believe all young people should have the opportunity to participate in sports, stay active, and feel a sense of belonging.

This is a complex issue that involves both inclusion and fairness in competition. My approach is to follow established policies and guidance from athletic associations and school systems, which are designed to balance these considerations and evolve as we learn more.

Where possible, we should look for practical solutions that allow students to participate while maintaining fair competition, such as clear eligibility guidelines or alternative options that ensure no child is excluded from the benefits of athletics.

My focus is on keeping sports accessible, fair, and positive for all students.

8. When transgender people are incarcerated or detained, how should officials decide what gender they should be held with?

I believe the primary responsibility in these situations is to ensure the safety, dignity, and well-being of everyone involved.

Decisions about housing should be made on a case-by-case basis, taking into account factors such as an individual’s gender identity, safety risks, medical needs, and the overall facility environment. Correctional professionals should have clear, consistent guidelines to assess these factors and make informed decisions.

In some cases, alternative arrangements—such as specialized units or additional supervision—may be appropriate to ensure safety for both the individual and others.

My approach is to prioritize safety and practicality, while treating people with dignity and ensuring decisions are thoughtful, consistent, and grounded in professional standards.

9. What restrictions, if any, would be appropriate on entertainment, such as drag shows, with content that involves crossdressing or other gender-nonconforming behavior?

I believe in upholding free expression while also applying common-sense standards around age-appropriate content.

Entertainment, including drag performances, is a form of expression and should generally not be restricted for adults. At the same time, when events are open to minors or publicly promoted in family settings, organizers should ensure content is appropriate for the intended audience and clearly communicated in advance.

Rather than broad restrictions, any concerns should be addressed through existing guidelines related to public decency, licensing, and age-appropriate programming.

My approach is to respect freedom of expression while ensuring clarity and appropriate standards so that community events are welcoming and suitable for their audiences.

10. When should therapies, such as conversion therapy, that seek to alter patients’ LGBTQ+ identity or change the behavior associated with such an identity, be allowed? When should they be restricted? Does it matter if the patient is a minor?

I believe every person deserves to be treated with dignity and supported in their well-being, especially when it comes to healthcare.

Individuals should be able to seek counseling or guidance that helps them explore their identity in a safe, supportive, and non-coercive environment. Care should be patient-centered, voluntary, and focused on well-being.

At the same time, safeguards are important to ensure that young people are protected and receiving appropriate, evidence-based care.

My approach is to prioritize safety, evidence-based care, and individual dignity, while ensuring appropriate protections, especially for minors.