After a year of controversy and deeply divided school board meetings, the Pine-Richland School District is moving toward a more inclusive future with the suspension of its controversial library book policy, Policy 109.1, and the introduction of a new, more equitable proposal that could finally address the systemic targeting of LGBTQ+ and BIPOC voices in school libraries.
On February 5th, the school board voted 6–2 to suspend the current policy, which has been widely criticized for its vague definitions and chilling effect on library diversity. The board is now considering a redlined revision that restores educator input, clarifies the book challenge process, and removes harmful, politically charged language conflating LGBTQ+ themes with vulgarity.
The only books that have ever been challenged under Pine-Richland’s policy, past and present, are stories centered on LGBTQ+ people and people of color. Current titles under review include All Boys Aren’t Blue by George M. Johnson, Heartstopper by Alice Oseman, Push by Sapphire, The Bluest Eye by Toni Morrison, and Homebody by Theo Parish. Not a single book focused on cisgender heterosexual characters or white-centric narratives has been formally challenged to date.
That’s a pattern.
Since 2023, right-wing activists and self-proclaimed parental rights advocates have attempted to weaponize vague terms like “explicit” and “vulgar” to target works by queer authors and Black authors. Policy 109.1, passed in March 2025, handed them the tools to do just that, introducing language that allowed books with “explicit sexual content” or “pervasive vulgarity” to be flagged, terms historically used to pathologize queer identity, especially in youth literature.
The proposed redlined version of Policy 109.1 brings a fresh perspective grounded in professional practice and student dignity.
Under the newly proposed policy, anyone wishing to challenge a book must first read it in its entirety and engage in a discussion with a librarian before escalating their concerns. If the issue proceeds, a review committee composed of educators, principals, and district staff is tasked with evaluating the material as a whole, guided by professional standards rather than personal beliefs. Importantly, access to challenged books will remain unrestricted throughout the review process, signaling a clear rejection of knee-jerk censorship. The policy also restores librarians to their rightful role at the center of book selection and defense, affirming their expertise in curating educational materials. Additionally, vague and politically charged language about “vulgarity” and “explicit content” has been narrowed or removed, helping to protect LGBTQ+ stories from being targeted under the guise of moral objection.
- Advertisement -
This is a massive shift from the version passed last year, which allowed individual board members to object to purchases and required public reviews of book lists, a process that became a tool for censorship, not transparency.
Board members like Ashley Fortier and Amy Cafardi, who support the proposed changes, have called out the performative timing of recent book challenges. No formal challenges were submitted under the old policy for nearly a year until this January, just after the board announced it would consider replacing the current rules. Two new challenges suddenly appeared, targeting the same books about queer and Black lives that have been on shelves for years.
Books like Heartstopper and All Boys Aren’t Blue aren’t “obscene”, they’re life-saving. They offer mirrors for queer and trans teens to see themselves reflected with honesty and compassion. Removing them sends a devastating message that their stories, and by extension, their identities, are inappropriate.
The board is set to revisit the redlined policy on February 23, 2026, where it may vote to officially adopt the new changes. Meanwhile, the suspension of the old policy offers temporary relief.