Bellbrook-Sugarcreek board hears public concern over draft parents' bill of rights; members discuss narrower language before July 1 deadline

At a Bellbrook-Sugarcreek Local School District meeting, residents, students and staff urged the board to narrow a draft “parents’ bill of rights” policy they said goes beyond state statute and could restrict access to library materials and counseling services.

The comments came during the public-comment period and a later first reading and discussion of the policy, which speakers said expands the statute’s focus on classroom instruction to include libraries and other materials and would require written parental consent in cases where the statute provides for opt-out notification.

Nicole Stewart, the district’s middle school media specialist, described school book fairs and the role libraries play in promoting reading but did not take a position on the policy. A public commenter identified in the record as Mr. Rausch argued the draft widens the statute’s scope. “It seems to be pulling school libraries in and taking out school instruction,” he said, adding that undefined terms such as “gender ideology” and “incidental references” would create enforcement problems.

Students from local high schools also spoke. Landon Brown, a student advisor to the GSA and diversity club at VHS, said the board should adopt safeguards for LGBTQ students and increase representation. “At the GSA club, we give people in our school a safe place to be,” Brown said, describing the group’s role as a refuge for students experiencing bullying or trauma. Lisa Lawson, a senior at Belburg High School and a member of Hope Squad, told the board that requiring parental approval for name or pronoun changes and immediate parental notification for counseling could cause “devastating consequences,” including risk to students’ safety and mental health. “Requiring students to out themselves to their parents in an unsafe environment can lead to devastating consequences,” Lawson said.

Board members discussed several specific issues raised by commenters: whether the policy should apply to library materials as well as classroom instruction; whether the district should require written parental consent (the draft requires consent) or preserve a parent opt-out for instructional materials (as the statute contemplates); and where to draw the age/grade cutoff (the draft currently lists kindergarten through sixth grade; speakers noted the statute’s restriction for younger grades and suggested alternatives such as K–5, K–8 or aligning with existing health-class grade levels). Several board members said the district’s building configuration and shared library spaces complicate an across-the-board grade cutoff.

The board confirmed the policy must be finalized by July 1 and said the district lawyer has reviewed the draft. Trustees encouraged colleagues and members of the public to submit proposed amendments in writing so counsel can review language before the next meeting. One trustee said minor clarifications could be handled between meetings, while significant changes should come back to a future meeting for formal amendment and vote.

No final action was taken at the meeting; the policy remained at first reading and under discussion. Board members asked staff and trustees who wish to propose changes to work with the district attorney and bring suggested language to the next meeting.

The board also noted a broader packet of policies under review that include other operational issues such as cell phones and artificial intelligence in classrooms; those items were not decided at this meeting.