Citizen Portal

Parents urge Roaring Fork board to remove "Understanding Our Bodies" lessons, citing age and notice concerns

Roaring Fork School Board of Directors · February 18, 2026

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Three public commenters told the board they view the district's "Understanding Our Bodies" curriculum as age-inappropriate, criticized communication and opt-out procedures, and said they would press the board to remove the lessons; board did not take immediate action during the public-comment period.

Three members of the public used the board's public-comment period to urge the Roaring Fork School Board to remove or change what they called the "Understanding Our Bodies" health curriculum and to improve parent notice procedures.

Tanner Gianetti opened public comment by saying he had "formally requested the resources and data" used when the curriculum was adopted and accusing the board of being "complicit" in keeping the materials in place. "I have every intention of ensuring that the board of the district is held accountable and that this curriculum is pulled from the district," he said.

Parker Nyslanik, a fourth-generation local and parent of two CRS students, said the curriculum had been implemented "without the proper due process and input from the parent community" and described his young child coming home upset after classmates said they had seen "pictures of penises and vaginas." "He's 7," Nyslanik said. "This is an at-home lesson, not a public school lesson."

Rick James, a grandparent, also urged an opt-in model rather than opt-out and said Spanish-language materials may not have been sufficiently communicated to Hispanic families. "Otherwise, it is clearly indoctrination," he said.

Board response: Chair opened the public-comment slot and reminded speakers about three-minute limits; directors did not take immediate action on the comments during the meeting. Several board members later discussed policies and next steps on other agenda items but did not vote or direct staff to remove the curriculum during this session.

What remains unresolved: Speakers asked for the board to rescind or remove curriculum materials and asked for a clear record of the materials and the data used in adoption. At least one commenter said he had requested those materials. The board did not provide a timeline or formal response during the meeting.