Pocatello trustees review draft ‘neutral classroom’ policy after heated public comment over flags and classroom displays

District administrators brought a draft addendum intended to guide classroom displays, flags and signage, prompting extended debate among trustees, staff and members of the public who described the proposed language as either necessary to preserve neutrality or harmful to students who need explicit signs of support.

Superintendent's staff said the proposed wording was modeled on language used by another district and on recent legislative proposals and that the board — not staff — should provide clear direction on acceptable classroom displays. “We just ask that we try to maintain a neutral classroom building property space for all learners,” a staff presenter said while introducing background on the draft language.

Public comment was strongly divided. Mary Anne McGrory, president of the Pocatello Education Association, told trustees the union opposes the proposed revision and called flags or ‘safe space’ stickers important signals that “schools, classrooms, and offices that have accepting messages … have higher learning, lower discipline issues, as well as a lower rate of suicidal ideation.” Another speaker, Dr. Jennifer Blake, a veteran educator representing a group of parents, said the district should emphasize academics and avoid allowing classroom displays that “have now caused a division between students.”

Trustees discussed legal and practical questions: whether the policy would restrict student artwork, club banners or symbols that staff say help vulnerable students feel accepted; whether the district should consult the Idaho School Boards Association (ISBA) and other districts for model language; and how to avoid litigation by applying the policy consistently. Several trustees said they wanted to keep the process public and to circulate drafts for comment rather than adopt policy immediately.

The board did not vote. Trustees directed staff to compare ISBA and local model policies, consult legal counsel, circulate the draft to trustees and the public, and return with a revised proposal at a later meeting so the board can consider a first reading after additional review.