Ohio village board of ed hears policy that would ban Pride flags

Six days before Christmas, Little Miami Board of Education introduced a policy that would affect LGBTQ+ displays in the classroom. Both local residents and surrounding area neighbors showed up onTuesday, Dec. 17 to the small Cincinnati-area village in Maineville to speak out in support and against the policy.

The proposed policy would only allow a limited number of displays, such as the American flag, state flags, university insignias (in approved locations) and items pertaining to a “temporary unit of study in the curriculum.” This would not only result in the removal of safe space posters with LGBTQ+ flags, but also much of what a teacher displays in the classroom.

The policy would also apply to “any electronic messaging, including emails any electronic messaging, including emails,” presumably including insignia that might be associated with the staff member’s signature. The policy does not contain language on enforcement. 

According to individuals who spoke during the public comment, photos of classrooms with LGBTQ+ symbols were specifically circulated online through social media.

A petition against the proposal by Moms for Little Miami has nearly 800 signatures. 

“The broad language would mean teachers have to remove any posters/signs/flags that are not related directly to curriculum,” the petition reads. “This would include, but is not limited to, signs that say things such as ‘Welcome to Our Classroom,’ ‘Let Your Light Shine,’ ‘Go Bengals/Reds/other sports teams!’ and more. This interpretation has been confirmed by Central Office.”

It’s not the first time an Ohio Board of Education considered this policy. 

• In 2023, Big Walnut School Board passed a resolution limiting school and classroom displays, including flags, with a nearly identical list of exceptions.
• In 2021, New Richmond Exempted Village Board of Education forced middle school teachers to remove “anything from [teacher/stafff] rooms that have rainbows on it.”
• In 2024, Mentor Public Schools ordered the removal of LGBTQ+-affirming posters from GLSEN, a national nonprofit working to end discrimination against LGBTQ+ students.

Public comment

Kelly Kohls, a leader of the National School Board Leadership Council, a “parents rights” organization that partners with Moms for America, an org that speaks out against “gender confusion,” spoke during public comment.

She said if the board did not pass the policy, people will send flags to the school.

“There is a groundswell of citizens waiting for you to enact this policy so they can send their desired flags and displays with the intent to see you either display their version of virtue signaling, or refuse to see their flags or displays,” she said. “If you refuse…they plan to sue you for viewpoint discrimination.”

Some speakers derided Kohls’ approach as one that deliberately mires the district in controversy to force them to enact the restrictive policy,

Other speakers said how the presence of an LGBTQ+ symbol was inherently exclusionary to cisgender straight people.

Rowan Rozzi, a 2020 graduate and transgender man, said those symbols were important. He spoke about his life after he came out in 8th grade, experiencing bullying which led to self-harm. 

“The Safe Space stickers…told me that the educators would see me for more than my identity — they would see me for my potential, for who I was, and support me all the same,” Rozzi said.

The room erupted in applause after he spoke.

One person encouraging the policy said bullying made her a “stronger individual in the long run,” and later said teachers coddling kids were one of the causes for school shootings. 

According to a child adolescent psychiatry study, bullying was found to possibly be an “important risk factor of suicide attempts among adolescents globally.” The study was also cited by The Trevor Project.

According to the district’s board policy, one of the school district goals and objectives is to “respond to each student’s need to develop a positive self-image and enhance his/her ability to determine, understand and examine his/her own capabilities, interests and goals.” Another goal is to understand value systems, cultures and heritage. Both goals and other board policy were cited by speakers against the restrictive flag policy.

A local pediatric physician, Kate Ruck, took the stand to speak about how environments can shape how a child feels about themselves and contribute to their wellbeing.

“If someone doesn’t feel safe in their environment, they will not be able to fully engage with the material whether that be learning or working,” she said. “This proposed flag policy appears to be a thinly veiled attempt to remove any potential cultural or LGBTQ+ ally flags, and I hope all here sees that for what it is.”

“Our community is a wonderful one, and to retain our fantastic teachers, to continue to develop a kinder, more compassionate world, I hope we can agree that this policy does not aid in making our schools any safer.” 

The December board meeting was a first reading of the policy. They do not pass or reject a proposal until the second reading. A special work session meeting on Thursday, Jan. 16 will discuss the policy, but the second reading has not been scheduled for a meeting yet. 🔥

IGNITE ACTION

• To contact the Little Miami Board of Education to voice your thoughts on this proposed policy, go here.

• Ask your school board about their policy on flags and insignia before this policy language makes its way to your district.