Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Flag Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parents warn board a restrictive flag/display policy could harm neurodivergent students; privacy concerns also raised
Summary
Public commenters at the Sept. 23 meeting urged the board to reconsider a proposed flag/display policy, citing impacts on neurodivergent students’ classroom communication and concerns about photo publication and executive‑session information later discussed publicly.
At the Little Miami School Board meeting, multiple community members urged caution about a proposed flag and display policy, and questioned whether the district had handled student‑photo privacy and executive‑session information appropriately.
Courtney McKean told the board that some neurodivergent students rely on visual displays, pictures and symbols as communication tools and argued that removing those displays could harm their ability to engage in class. "When you take out those displays in the classroom ... you remove their communication," McKean said, asking the board to consider the effects of a restrictive policy and to "please vote no on that policy."
Other commenters raised concerns about how previously discussed executive‑session matters were partially repeated in open session, and several residents requested more stakeholder engagement before the policy is finalized. Amanda Van Veil said the mix of executive‑session material and public discussion at a recent special meeting was "bizarre" and that the board should either keep matters private or discuss them fully in public. She said she was "disappointed the board took no action when they returned from the executive session" and suggested symbolic actions such as a censure when appropriate.
Separately, board members and staff addressed a concern about photos and video that might include students on a district 'do not publish' list. Superintendent Morgan said she checks the list when photos are published and stated that only one student on the list could have been present at the pep rally and was not in the gym at the time. A board member asked for access to video evidence to confirm the details.
The board discussed delaying deeper consideration of the flag policy until more stakeholders, including Diane (referenced by board members) and union representatives, could participate; the policy remains at the first‑read stage and may be revisited at a special meeting Oct. 6 or the October regular meeting for a second read.
