Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the State Education Policies topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
North Ridgeville board approves second reading of two state-required policies despite vice president’s objections
Summary
The North Ridgeville City Board of Education voted to approve the second reading of two state-required policies at its June 17, 2025 meeting after Board Vice President McCarthy publicly objected to the measures and said she would vote to approve reluctantly.
The North Ridgeville City Board of Education voted to approve the second reading of two state-required policies at its June 17, 2025 meeting after a board discussion that included a lengthy statement by Board Vice President McCarthy opposing the measures in principle.
McCarthy told the board the policies — described during the meeting as the Parents' Bill of Rights and the so-called “Bakker bill” — “threaten the dignity, safety, and mental health of some of our most vulnerable students,” and she said a recent proposal in the state budget to redefine biological sex would “erase transgender and intersex individuals from legal protections.”
McCarthy said she recognizes the board’s legal obligation to implement state law but insisted she does not support the mandates. “I will regretfully vote to approve these policies tonight because to do otherwise would endanger disability and operation of our district with potential expensive litigation and loss of funding,” she said. McCarthy said she will continue to advocate for inclusive, evidence-based policies to protect student safety and mental health.
Prior to McCarthy’s remarks, the board’s agenda noted a second reading of two new Ohio Department of Education policies and a motion to approve the policy report was made and seconded on the record. The meeting record shows a roll-call vote approving the policy report; board members recorded as voting yes in the transcript include Baca, Haynes (spelled in the transcript as Hanes/Hayes/Haynes in different places), Grigsby, McCarthy (recorded as “regretfully yes”), and Saxon. The transcript records the votes as “Yes” by roll call; the board did not record a vote against or a motion to table.
The action was a formal approval of policy adoptions required by the state; board members emphasized the distinction between local preferences and the board’s legal duty to implement state requirements. McCarthy’s comments were an explicit, on-the-record objection and a commitment to continue advocacy outside the board’s formal action.
The board did not take new local policy action separate from the state-mandated policies at this meeting.
