The latest episode in Pine-Richland School District’s yearslong discussions about book bans and book review policies took place Thursday during a nearly seven-hour school board meeting.
Tempers occasionally flared as audience members shouted and board members sometimes argued among themselves while attempting to revise its “Library Resources” policy.
The meeting was the third in a series of contentious gatherings to read and amend a policy that would give the school board power over the acquisition and consideration of books in the district — including whether to remove them.
Tara Niesslein has a third grader and a sixth grader in the district. She said she felt compelled to speak at Thursday’s meeting because the potential policy change “actively affects” her children’s access to books.
Though the policy change is supposed to bolster parental rights, Niesslein said the current policy — which allows parents to challenge a book’s inclusion in the library — is enough.
Niesslein describes herself as a conservative. She said she voted for some of the board members whose views she now opposes. Niesslein said she worries about Pine-Richland’s “educational integrity” and the potential for costly lawsuits should the board eventually attempt to remove books.
“It takes a lot to get the continued attention of moderate voters like me, but we are listening, paying attention and ready to vote,” she said at the meeting.
Previously, the district formed a committee for the review of 14 books challenged by parents in 2023, many of which focused on LGBTQ characters.
The committee offered recommendations to Superintendent Brian Miller who ultimately recommended that the titles remain. Last last year, board members began to discuss the revised policy that led to Thursday’s outcry.
Board members, librarians and administrators debated the wording and goals of the policy, and often sought to define nebulous terms such as “classical art.” Some of these speakers, including board member Ashley Fortier, expressed concern about the “vagueness” of the policy and its ultimate “feasibility.”
“Not every book in the library needs to be educationally suitable or developmentally relevant for every child,” Miller said at the meeting.
While chairwoman Christina Brussalis kept tight control over the meeting’s rules of order, Fortier said she sought brief suspension of the rules to allow for more open discussion of the policy. These motions failed.
Chris Bonneau, who has a sixth grader in the district, said he tuned in to the livestream of the meeting from a work conference in Puerto Rico.
He said the priorities of the board are “mind-blowing” and some members are “just not reasonable.” Pine-Richland, he said, maintains a positive reputation and high-quality educators. But he worries that “ideological agendas” may squander those things.
When contacted for comment, board member Michael Wiethorn declined to comment. Other board members did not respond to requests for comment.
The board may resume discussion of the policy during its Monday meeting.
This post was originally published on here
