Students and community members press Little Miami board over removal of 'Hate has no home here' poster and recent resignation

A stream of students, parents and community members used the Little Miami board’s public comment period to demand answers about the recent removal of a "Hate has no home here" poster and to press the board for clearer accountability after disclosures about a former board member.

Fourteen public commenters — including middle- and high-school students and parents — spoke at length about how the poster's removal made some students feel unsafe and cited increased bullying and targeted incidents in the school. "It is obvious that hate has a home here when you destroy the symbol stating that it doesn't," said Zoe Kushner, a Little Miami High School senior, describing the emotional impact on students.

Students described being targeted and bullied after the poster’s removal; one speaker said students were pressing elevator buttons as harassment and mocking disabled students. "Children can't learn if they don't feel safe," said Andrea Jackson, a former student and parent with a master's in early childhood education.

Several speakers raised concerns about the process used to remove the display and said required steps under the law (as explained by the district’s legal guidance) were not followed. Amanda Van Mill, citing a public‑records review, said the board’s lawyer provided formal guidance about how parents should submit complaints but that the district did not follow the established written process in handling this poster.

Comments also focused on recent revelations about statements attributed to a former board member (Dan Smith). One commenter (speaker 28) said published statements praising Hitler, denying the Holocaust, and advocating violence were "not simply political controversy" but "a moral issue" and urged the board to issue a clear denouncement of antisemitism and Holocaust denial. That speaker asked board members to publicly renounce such positions and said some members should consider resignation if they cannot do so.

Members of the public requested procedural transparency for the board's planned appointment to a vacant seat later that night, suggesting possible conflicts of interest and calling for recusal where board members had initiated legal actions involving applicants.

Board leadership acknowledged receipt of the concerns. At the end of public comment the board moved to executive session to continue candidate interviews. The chair said the former board member offered and the board accepted his resignation.

What happens next: Community speakers asked for a public statement denouncing antisemitism, more transparent application and appointment steps for the vacancy, and board action to address bullying and student safety. The board entered executive session to proceed with candidate interviews.