They Call Me Jonesy and the School Board Call That Keeps Coming

The text from Sheriff Richard K. Jones arrived while the phone sat face-down during a showing of Young George Washington. The calls and messages kept lighting the edge of the screen in the dark theater. One of them was Jonesy himself letting me know that the book was out and that a careful reading would be worth the time. The timing was almost perfect in its inconvenience. A planned window to get out of the normal daily life pattern had already opened. The decision had been made to break the usual Friday-night routine, drive a different route, and head for South Bass Island rather than return straight home. Packages left on a front porch while the household was away create their own problems. So the order waited until the return was certain. The Amazon driver handed the book over in the driveway as the camper was being backed into its usual spot after the short island run. Twenty-four hours of steady reading followed. 

They Call Me Jonesy: Let’s Get Real About Saving America is not a polished campaign document. It is the voice of a man who has spent decades as Butler County Sheriff, wearing the same cowboy hat that has become a kind of quiet declaration, speaking the same plain language about crime, family, political correctness, and what he calls the swamp. The second half of the book returns again and again to a single practical point: if the country is going to be fixed, the most important public office available to ordinary citizens is the local school board. The phrase and the idea appear often enough that it begins to feel directed. Jonesy has watched the same ground for a long time. He knows the people who stay outside the formal structures and still manage to move things. He also knows how many of those same people keep getting told they should step inside. 

Politics remains a bloodsport even when the combatants know and respect one another. There have been seasons when Jones and others in the county stood on opposite sides of particular fights. That never erased the underlying regard. The nature of the game requires choosing a side and playing it hard. Sometimes the people across the board are the ones who would otherwise be natural allies. That is simply how the contest works. Jones himself has never shown much appetite for trading the sheriff’s office for something higher. He has said, in public and in the book, that effectiveness often improves when a person stays outside the formal swamp rather than climbing deeper into it. The same logic applies in reverse to those who have never worn a badge or held a seat. The most useful work is frequently done by people who refuse to become creatures of the system they are trying to restrain. 

The pressure to enter the school-board arena does not come only from Jonesy’s pages. It arrives weekly, sometimes more often. The arguments are familiar: the schools shape the next generation; the curriculum, the hiring, the culture, and the tax levies are decided there; surrendering those seats to people who treat traditional American formation as the problem is a slow form of civic suicide. Ben Nguyen’s recent election to the Lakota board stands as a living example that younger, clear-eyed candidates can still win and serve. The point is not lost. School boards remain the most direct lever ordinary citizens still possess. When they are captured by people who view the institution as a platform for every progressive fashion rather than a place to transmit competence, literacy, and ordered liberty, the damage compounds for decades. 

Yet the practical question remains. A life already organized around seventy-hour professional weeks, family obligations, writing, and the constant low-grade vigilance that comes with a public profile does not easily absorb another formal role. Most elected officials keep outside employment because the official salary alone is rarely enough and because the work itself expands to fill every available hour. Adding a school-board seat would require rearranging the entire calendar around meeting nights, executive sessions, and the inevitable political theater that follows any vote that displeases the organized interests. Controversy travels with the name. There are people who read the work, request signed copies of The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business, and fly into Butler County Regional to hand over stacks for their own teams. There are also people who scheme in the opposite direction. Changing routes, avoiding predictable patterns, and occasionally leaving the mainland for an island that requires deliberate effort to reach are not theatrical gestures. They are the ordinary precautions of a man who would rather not end up in a courtroom explaining a justified use of force. The island trip provided a short psychological reset for me. The pressure did not disappear, but the constant proximity did. That matters.  When things are getting thick, its best to step away from the pressure so not to be impacted by it. 

Jonesy’s repeated insistence that the school board is the place to fight does not require every capable person to file petitions tomorrow. It does require that the capable people stop treating the board as someone else’s problem. Jonesy’s book’s larger argument is that America is not saved by distant national theater alone. It is saved, or lost, in the places where children are taught what to value, what to respect, and what to defend. The sheriff who prefers to remain a sheriff rather than become a congressman or a senator is making the same point from the other direction: stay close to the ground, stay effective, and do not surrender the institutions that still answer directly to the people who live under them.

The book is worth the careful reading it received. Jonesy has made hard decisions over a long career and has refused to sand the edges off the lessons. The message about the school board lands with particular force on those who already know the terrain and who keep being asked the same question. The answer, for now, is not a categorical refusal. It is a recognition that effectiveness has its own schedule and its own costs. The arena is real. The children in the classrooms are real. The people who would rather keep the seats filled with ideological placeholders are also real. Jonesy is not wrong about any of that. The only remaining question is how many more seasons the current arrangement can continue before the price of staying outside becomes higher than the price of stepping in.

They Call Me Jonesy is available now. Read it. Then look at the next school-board ballot in the county and decide what the ground actually requires.  The larger fight over what is taught, what is remembered, and what is defended has never been only about one board or one county. It has always been about whether the next generation will inherit a coherent civilization or a managed decline. Jonesy has stated his preference clearly. The rest is up to the people who still have the energy and the will to act on it.

Footnotes

1.  Richard K. Jones, They Call Me Jonesy: Let’s Get Real About Saving America (2025/2026), available via Amazon and theycallmejonesy.com. The official site describes the work as a candid leadership book addressing crime, political correctness, “The Swamp,” and the practical question of what ordinary citizens can do to save the country.

2.  Official book site, theycallmejonesy.com, accessed July 2026. Testimonials include statements from Mark Lamb, J.D. Vance, and former Middletown Police Chief Rodney Muterspaw emphasizing law-and-order leadership and traditional values.

3.  Rich Hoffman, “They Call Me Jonesy: The Night the Arena Roared and the Establishment Lost the Plot,” richhoffmanbooks.com, July 27, 2026. Earlier treatment of the same volume focusing on the 2016 U.S. Bank Arena appearance, family destruction by the drug culture, and Jones’s style of practical authority.

4.  Lakota Local School District Board of Education roster, lakotaonline.com, listing Benjamin Nguyen as a seated board member beginning January 2026. Nguyen, a 2025 Lakota West graduate, won election in November 2025 and has been described as among the youngest elected officials in Ohio.

5.  Butler County Sheriff’s Office public statements and local coverage (Journal-News, FOX19, WCPO) documenting Jones’s long record of engagement with area school boards on security, resource officers, and related policy.

6.  Personal observation of the repeated emphasis inside the volume itself on school-board service as the highest-leverage local office available to citizens concerned with the direction of the country.

Bibliography

Jones, Richard K. They Call Me Jonesy: Let’s Get Real About Saving America. 2025/2026. https://theycallmejonesy.com/ and Amazon listings.

Hoffman, Rich. “They Call Me Jonesy: The Night the Arena Roared and the Establishment Lost the Plot.” richhoffmanbooks.com, July 27, 2026.

Lakota Local School District. Board of Education roster and meeting materials. lakotaonline.com.

Butler County Sheriff’s Office. Public releases and social-media statements regarding school security and related policy, 2018–2026.Various local reporting (Journal-News, FOX19 NOW, WCPO 9, Cincinnati.com ) 

Rich Hoffman

More about me

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

About the Author: Rich Hoffman

Rich Hoffman is an author, political consultant, and strategic advisor based in Cincinnati, Ohio, and the creator of The Politics of Heaven—a unique framework that connects biblical theology, ancient history, and modern power structures to explain how moral alignment and spiritual forces shape global events. Blending real-world political experience with deep research into archaeology, UFO phenomena, and suppressed historical narratives, Hoffman offers compelling commentary on topics ranging from ancient civilizations and the Dead Sea Scrolls to modern populist movements, paranormal continuity, and leadership strategy in chaotic environments. As the author of The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business and the forthcoming Politics of Heaven, he brings a grounded yet provocative voice to media discussions, supported by firsthand experiences and a cross-disciplinary approach that bridges science, history, and theology. For interviews, speaking engagements, or expert analysis, visit richhoffmanbooks.com or contact directly via phone at 513-307-5815 or email at rhoffman@richhoffmanbooks.com.  If you’ve seen the movie, Disclosure Day and want to talk about it and the implications of Presidnet Trump’s UAP disclosures, let me know and we can bring some color to your coverage. https://richhoffmanbooks.com/media-inquiries-broadcast-topics-and-contact-info/?frame-nonce=ad51e7ecba I do have a firsthand UFO encounter to discuss.

The Lakota Grooming Scandal: Power, Protection, and the Price of Silence in Our Public Schools

I have watched this story unfold with a mixture of anger, sadness, and that familiar sinking feeling that comes when you realize the system is working exactly as designed—not for the kids, but for the adults who feed off the perpetual motion machine of public money and institutional self-preservation. A mother filed a federal lawsuit on July 1, 2026, alleging that a Lakota Local Schools teacher groomed and sexually abused her daughter over roughly three years, starting when the girl was 13 years old in seventh grade at Liberty Junior School. 

According to the detailed complaint, the teacher—identified in court documents as Ronald Henrich—did not even teach the girl in any of her classes. He welcomed her into his classroom during study hall periods, showed her “special attention,” and began building a relationship. Messages started on the district’s own Remind app. The student confided personal struggles, including mental health issues. The communications continued and escalated even after the mother tried to set boundaries. By ninth grade, the meetings moved to a closed-door “mindfulness room” for Friday lunches. Communications shifted to district email and Google Docs when access to Remind was curtailed. In March 2025, the mother discovered the teacher actively typing “extremely sexually graphic content” into a shared Canva document with her daughter. She recorded it. She called the Butler County Sheriff’s Office. 

The district’s response, according to the lawsuit, was to promise administrative leave and restricted access to technology, then quietly allow the teacher to take Family and Medical Leave Act leave instead. Less than two weeks after the explicit messages surfaced—and while investigations by the district, sheriff, and children’s services were still open—the district approved his retirement. No public discipline. No immediate report to the Ohio Department of Education, as many parents would expect. The teacher walked away with his pension and benefits intact while the family was left to pick up the pieces. 

The superintendent, Ashley Whitely, issued the standard institutional denial: the district “denies all allegations” and claims student safety is its top priority.  Meanwhile, the mother’s lawsuit also details earlier reports she made that went unaddressed, repeated class pull-outs without parental notification, and even troubling lapses in how the school nurse handled the student’s medication—stockpiling Tylenol that contributed to a suicide attempt and failing to manage anxiety medication on a trip properly. These are not small administrative hiccups. They paint a picture of a system that had multiple opportunities to intervene and chose not to.

Then there is the part that really sticks in my craw. According to people who have followed the internal handling, the HR director—Jeff Rouff—essentially shrugged and said something to the effect that the age of consent in Ohio is 16, so what’s the big deal? Two consenting adults. Nothing illegal happened. That line of thinking is exactly why these situations metastasize. It ignores the entire grooming process that began at 13, when the girl was under the care and authority of this adult in a position of power inside a public school building. It ignores the use of school-issued devices and district apps to conduct the relationship. It ignores the closed doors, the missed classes, the emotional manipulation of a vulnerable child who had already suffered prior sexual abuse. Age of consent statutes were never intended to give cover to adults in positions of trust who spend years cultivating access to minors. That is not a gray area. That is the precise reason we have laws and professional conduct codes for educators in the first place.

I heard about problems surrounding this teacher roughly a year before the lawsuit dropped. Other parents and observers had been talking. The circle had already started to form. When the story finally broke across local media—Channel 5, Local 12, FOX 19—the superintendent’s immediate public move was not a somber address about accountability and root-cause fixes. It was a cheerleading video hyping a fall tax increase, talking about hiring dozens more staff members, rolling out a corporate “roadmap” with “stakeholders,” and reminding everyone to keep supporting public schools. The timing felt deliberate. Distract, then reassure the taxpayers who write the checks. Keep the money flowing.

That is the game I have been describing for years. Lakota, like many large suburban districts, is constantly in or approaching levy mode. The narrative must be controlled: we are great, we are improving, we need a little more of your property tax money to keep doing the wonderful things we do. Bad stories—especially stories that suggest adults in the building are preying on children and that leadership circled the wagons—threaten that narrative. So the wagons circle. The teacher retires quietly. HR offers the age-of-consent talking point. The superintendent films the upbeat video. The teachers’ union, which exists in large part to protect its members from consequences, stays largely silent or issues the usual generic statements about due process. And the machine keeps turning.

This is not an isolated incident. The lawsuit itself references a pattern of other cases involving Lakota employees over the years—some that resulted in convictions or license revocations, others that were handled with quiet exits.  Former board member Darbi Boddy, who has remained a vocal parent advocate even after her time on the board ended, issued a clear public statement criticizing the handling of this situation. Good for her. We need more people willing to say the obvious out loud rather than hide behind “stakeholder engagement” jargon.

What troubles me most is how predictable the protection response has become. When something like this surfaces, the institution’s first instinct is not “How do we make sure this never happens again and how do we support the victim?” It is “How do we contain the damage to our brand and our funding pipeline?” The HR director’s reported comment about 16 being legal is a perfect example of that mindset. It treats the endpoint—the moment the child turned 16—as the only thing that matters, while erasing the years of grooming and boundary erosion that got her there. It treats a minor student in a teacher’s care as just another “consenting adult” the second the calendar flips. That is not how any responsible adult in education should think. It is how an institution thinks when its primary loyalty is to itself and the revenue stream that sustains it.

Public education in its current monopolistic, union-protected, tax-funded form has structural problems that make these failures almost inevitable. When you combine compulsory attendance, massive budgets, powerful collective bargaining agreements that make firing even grossly negligent employees difficult and expensive, and a culture that treats any criticism as an attack on “the children” or “public education itself,” you create exactly the conditions for cover-ups. The money keeps coming in as long as the bad stories stay buried or get spun. Parents who raise hell are dismissed as “haters” or people with “unrealistically high moral standards.” Meanwhile, the actual standard on the ground—don’t have sex with kids in the classroom or via school devices, don’t groom them for years, don’t let it slide when a parent reports it—somehow becomes negotiable the moment it threatens the budget or the reputation.

I am not saying every teacher is doing this, but too many are. The vast majority are not. But the ones who are counting on the system’s reluctance to act decisively. They count on the HR director who will find the legal technicality. They count on the superintendent, who will film the upbeat video instead of cleaning house. They count on the union that will fight to the last dollar of taxpayer money to protect a member who should never have been in a classroom with minors. And they count on enough parents staying disengaged or intimidated for the story to fade before real accountability arrives.

The mother in this case did what too few parents feel empowered to do: she documented, she reported, she refused to let it disappear. Her lawsuit is now public. The allegations are serious and detailed. Whether every claim is ultimately proven in court is for the legal process to decide. But the pattern of institutional response—quiet exit, legal denials, distraction videos, and the age-of-consent shrug—is already on display for anyone willing to look. That pattern is what should alarm every parent in Lakota and every parent in any district that operates the same way.

How many other kids right now are in unhealthy dynamics with adults who hold power over their grades, their schedules, their daily lives inside these buildings? How many school-issued devices are carrying messages that would make any decent parent’s blood run cold if they saw them? How many times has a concerned parent been told some version of “nothing to see here, move along, and please vote yes on the next levy”? I would be willing to bet the number is higher than any of us want to admit. This case only became a story because one mother refused to be quiet. The rest stay invisible because the system is optimized for exactly that outcome.

We keep being told that more money, more staff, more programs, and more “roadmaps” will fix what ails public education. I have watched this play out locally for years. The money keeps increasing. The problems—academic stagnation in too many areas, cultural capture, and now these horrifying failures of basic child protection—persist or worsen. At some point, parents have to ask whether the institution itself is the problem, not the lack of funding. When the first instinct of leadership is to protect the adult and the budget rather than the child, the social contract has already been broken.

Summary of Doe v. Lakota Local Schools (Filed July 1, 2026)

Important: This is a civil complaint containing allegations made by the plaintiffs. The allegations have been filed in federal court but have not been proven in court unless and until established through litigation. [Doe v Lakota Schools | PDF]

Overview

A mother (“Jane Doe”) and her daughter (“Jill Doe”), a minor student in the Lakota Local School District, filed a federal lawsuit against:

  • Lakota Local Schools
  • Former teacher Ronald Henrich
  • Superintendent Ashley Whitely
  • Principal Bill Brinkman

The lawsuit alleges that Henrich groomed and sexually abused Jill over approximately three years and that district officials failed to prevent, investigate, or properly respond to the misconduct. [Doe v Lakota Schools | PDF]


Timeline of Alleged Events

2022–2023 School Year (7th Grade)

According to the complaint:

  • Jill was 13 years old and had documented mental health struggles and prior trauma.
  • Although she was not formally identified as a gifted student, she began attending a gifted-program study hall supervised by Ronald Henrich.
  • Henrich allegedly began developing a special relationship with her and communicating extensively through the district’s Remind messaging app.
  • Jill reportedly disclosed personal information, including mental health struggles and prior abuse.
  • The lawsuit alleges the district failed to monitor or investigate the growing relationship. [Doe v Lakota Schools | PDF]

January 2024 Suicide Attempt

The complaint alleges:

  • Jill stockpiled Tylenol obtained from a school nurse over several days.
  • On January 22, 2024, she consumed approximately 4,500 mg in a suicide attempt while at school.
  • She was hospitalized and spent four days in psychiatric care.
  • The district allegedly failed to supervise medication administration properly. [Doe v Lakota Schools | PDF]

Summer 2024

The lawsuit claims:

  • Henrich continued communicating with Jill during summer break.
  • Messages allegedly became increasingly personal.
  • Jill’s mother became concerned and restricted access to the messaging app outside school hours.
  • The complaint argues district monitoring failed to detect inappropriate communications. [Doe v Lakota Schools | PDF]

2024–2025 School Year (9th Grade)

The complaint alleges that:

  • Henrich was assigned to a different school building but continued visiting Jill’s building.
  • He allegedly met her weekly for private lunches.
  • He brought her food and regularly pulled her from class for mentoring sessions.
  • Communications allegedly shifted to district email and Google documents after the Remind app was discontinued.
  • Jill reportedly missed significant class time due to meetings with Henrich.
  • Teachers allegedly expressed concerns about her absences, but her mother was not informed. [Doe v Lakota Schools | PDF]

January–March 2025 Escalation

According to the complaint:

  • Henrich allegedly contacted Jill’s therapist directly without parental permission.
  • The two allegedly arranged a meeting at a driving range.
  • On March 14, 2025, Jill participated in a gifted-program event where her parents observed what they considered unusual interactions between her and Henrich. [Doe v Lakota Schools | PDF]

March 20, 2025: Discovery of Explicit Messages

This is the central allegation of the lawsuit.

The complaint states:

  • Jill’s mother inspected Jill’s district-issued Chromebook.
  • She discovered a shared Canva document allegedly being used for communication between Jill and Henrich.
  • The mother and stepfather reportedly recorded nearly an hour of sexually explicit messages allegedly typed by Henrich.
  • The complaint includes graphic excerpts from those messages.
  • Butler County Sheriff’s deputies were called to the home and allegedly observed additional messages being typed while officers were present. [Doe v Lakota Schools | PDF]

After Discovery

The lawsuit claims:

  • The Sheriff’s Office informed the district on March 21, 2025.
  • The family was initially told Henrich would be placed on administrative leave and barred from district property.
  • Later, the parents discovered through board records that Henrich had instead been granted Family Medical Leave and subsequently retired.
  • The complaint alleges the district failed to investigate adequately and failed to report misconduct to state authorities. [Doe v Lakota Schools | PDF]

Children’s Services Finding

The complaint states that:

  • Butler County Children Services substantiated abuse allegations involving Henrich and Jill.
  • The family argues the district still failed to take meaningful disciplinary action. [Doe v Lakota Schools | PDF]

Return to School

The lawsuit alleges:

  • Jill was prohibited from using a Chromebook as a safety measure.
  • Teachers allegedly failed to provide equivalent paper assignments.
  • She allegedly faced stigma and negative treatment related to the abuse investigation.
  • Principal Brinkman allegedly failed to correct the situation. [Doe v Lakota Schools | PDF]

Fall–Winter 2025

According to the complaint:

  • Jill continued experiencing serious emotional difficulties.
  • Another teacher reportedly raised concerns after she began seeking excessive contact with him.
  • In December 2025, Jill allegedly contacted Henrich using another student’s phone.
  • Henrich allegedly picked her up from a school activity and spent time with her at a park before returning her.
  • The family ultimately obtained a protection order against Henrich in January 2026. [Doe v Lakota Schools | PDF]

Broader District Allegations

The complaint argues Henrich’s case reflects a larger pattern within Lakota Schools.

It references previous incidents involving:

  • Justin Dennis
  • Nick McGill
  • Former Superintendent Matt Miller
  • George Merk
  • Robert Supinger
  • Angela Johnson

The plaintiffs argue these incidents demonstrate a longstanding failure by the district to identify, stop, or adequately respond to staff misconduct involving students. These allegations, presented by the plaintiffs as evidence of a pattern, have not been adjudicated in this case. [Doe v Lakota Schools | PDF]


Claims Filed

The lawsuit includes numerous claims, including:

Federal Civil Rights Claims (42 U.S.C. § 1983)

  • State-created danger
  • Special relationship doctrine
  • Conduct that “shocks the conscience”
  • Equal protection violations
  • Inadequate district policies and protection systems

Disability Claims

  • Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
  • Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act

State Law Claims

  • Negligent supervision
  • Negligence per se
  • Negligent infliction of emotional distress
  • Intentional infliction of emotional distress (against Henrich)
  • Loss of filial consortium (mother’s claim) [Doe v Lakota Schools | PDF]

Relief Requested

The plaintiffs seek:

  • Compensatory damages
  • Actual damages
  • Punitive damages
  • Attorney fees
  • Costs
  • Interest
  • Jury trial on all applicable claims [Doe v Lakota Schools | PDF]

Bottom Line Review

The complaint alleges that a Lakota teacher groomed and sexually abused a vulnerable student over several years using district facilities, technology, and access to the student, while school administrators allegedly ignored warning signs, failed to take corrective action after discovery, and inadequately protected the student afterward. The lawsuit seeks damages under federal civil rights laws, disability laws, and Ohio tort law. [Doe v Lakota Schools | PDF]

Based on the civil complaint, the accusations and behaviors of Ronald Henrich against the minor plaintiff include a systematic pattern of grooming, manipulation, and sexual abuse over three years:

 **Grooming and Relationship Development**

**Unauthorized Access:** Henrich allowed Jill to attend his “gifted” program study hall instead of her assigned one in seventh grade, despite her not being a designated gifted student.

**Targeting Vulnerabilities:** He built a relationship with Jill by showing her “special attention” and exploiting her personal struggles, including her history of anxiety, self-harm, and past sexual abuse, which she shared with him.

**Mentoring Pretense:** He repeatedly pulled Jill out of her regular classes for one-on-one “mentoring” sessions, claiming it was necessary for her anxiety and mental health.

**App-Based Communication:** He messaged Jill frequently on the District’s Remind app, often outside of school hours, with messages that became increasingly personal, such as saying “good morning” and “good night” and discussing their dinners.

**Switching Platforms:** When the District ended its contract with the Remind app, Henrich continued his daily personal communications through Jill’s District email and Google Docs accounts.

 **Boundary Violations and Stalking**

 **Secluded Lunches:** During Jill’s ninth-grade year, Henrich—who was no longer assigned to her building—visited her every Friday to eat lunch alone with her in a “mindfulness room” with the door closed, often bringing her food from outside the school.

**Inappropriate Physical Presence:** He “stalked” Jill by visiting her after band practice in a building where he had no official responsibilities.

**Circumventing Parents:** He reached out directly to Jill’s therapist without her mother’s consent to discuss “developments” in Jill’s mental health.

**Orchestrated Meetings:** He arranged to meet Jill at a local driving range outside of school hours and feigned that their encounter was a “coincidence” to her family. 

 **Inappropriate Conversation with Mother:** He told Jill’s mother that he had lost sleep and weight over their relationship and that he “missed how things used to be,” when teachers could drive students alone in their vehicles.

**Sexual Abuse and Graphic Misconduct**

**Canva Incident:** On March 20, 2025, Jill’s mother discovered Henrich was actively typing and immediately deleting extremely sexually graphic messages on a live Canva document shared with Jill.

**Graphic Content:** These recorded messages included detailed descriptions of Henrich engaging in rough sexual foreplay and penetrative acts with Jill, which he referred to as “punishment.”

**Physical Abuse:** The messages depicted Henrich causing Jill pain, pulling her hair, and smacking her. 

**Post-Discovery Misconduct**

 **Unauthorized Contact:** In December 2025, after Butler County Children’s Services had substantiated the abuse, Henrich communicated with Jill during the school day via another student’s phone.

**Physical Encounter:** A few days later, Henrich picked Jill up from a mandatory school band practice and drove her to a park where they “laid together” in his vehicle before he returned her to school.

Footnotes

1.  Details of the federal lawsuit filed July 1, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, as reported in contemporaneous coverage by the Cincinnati Enquirer and Journal-News.

2.  Allegations regarding the timeline, use of the Remind app, Canva document, mindfulness room meetings, and district response drawn from the complaint were summarized in multiple local outlets.

3.  District statement denying allegations and emphasizing student safety priorities, reported across local media following the lawsuit filing.

4.  References to prior incidents and pattern allegations contained within the 2026 lawsuit filings and prior local reporting on other Lakota employee cases.

5.  Ohio age of consent is 16; however, professional conduct codes for educators and laws regarding persons in positions of authority create additional prohibitions on sexual conduct with students that do not turn solely on the general age of consent.

Bibliography for Further Reading

•  Cincinnati Enquirer, “Parent says Lakota teacher groomed and abused her daughter,” July 8, 2026. 

•  Journal-News, “Lawsuit: Lakota teacher ‘groomed and sexually abused’ a student and was allowed to take medical leave, retire,” July 7, 2026 (updated July 9). 

•  FOX19 / Local 12 coverage of the July 2026 lawsuit and related statements.

•  Ohio Department of Education professional conduct standards for educators (ongoing reference for context on boundaries and reporting obligations).

•  General resources on educator sexual misconduct patterns: U.S. Department of Education reports and studies on employee misconduct in K-12 settings (searchable via ED.gov).

•  Local coverage of prior Lakota cases involving Justin Dennis and others referenced in the 2026 lawsuit for pattern context.

•  Darbi Boddy’s public statements and commentary on Lakota issues (available via local media archives and her public channels).

•  Ohio Revised Code sections on sexual battery, unlawful sexual conduct with a minor, and school employee reporting requirements.

Rich Hoffman

More about me

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

About the Author: Rich Hoffman

Rich Hoffman is an author, political consultant, and strategic advisor based in Cincinnati, Ohio, and the creator of The Politics of Heaven—a unique framework that connects biblical theology, ancient history, and modern power structures to explain how moral alignment and spiritual forces shape global events. Blending real-world political experience with deep research into archaeology, UFO phenomena, and suppressed historical narratives, Hoffman offers compelling commentary on topics ranging from ancient civilizations and the Dead Sea Scrolls to modern populist movements, paranormal continuity, and leadership strategy in chaotic environments. As the author of The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business and the forthcoming Politics of Heaven, he brings a grounded yet provocative voice to media discussions, supported by firsthand experiences and a cross-disciplinary approach that bridges science, history, and theology. For interviews, speaking engagements, or expert analysis, visit richhoffmanbooks.com or contact directly via phone at 513-307-5815 or email at rhoffman@richhoffmanbooks.com.  If you’ve seen the movie, Disclosure Day and want to talk about it and the implications of Presidnet Trump’s UAP disclosures, let me know and we can bring some color to your coverage. https://richhoffmanbooks.com/media-inquiries-broadcast-topics-and-contact-info/?frame-nonce=ad51e7ecba I do have a firsthand UFO encounter to discuss.

The Lakota Grooming Scandal: Power, Protection, and the Price of Silence in Our Public Schools

I have watched this story unfold with a mixture of anger, sadness, and that familiar sinking feeling that comes when you realize the system is working exactly as designed—not for the kids, but for the adults who feed off the perpetual motion machine of public money and institutional self-preservation. A mother filed a federal lawsuit on July 1, 2026, alleging that a Lakota Local Schools teacher groomed and sexually abused her daughter over roughly three years, starting when the girl was 13 years old in seventh grade at Liberty Junior School. 

According to the detailed complaint, the teacher—identified in court documents as Ronald Henrich—did not even teach the girl in any of her classes. He welcomed her into his classroom during study hall periods, showed her “special attention,” and began building a relationship. Messages started on the district’s own Remind app. The student confided personal struggles, including mental health issues. The communications continued and escalated even after the mother tried to set boundaries. By ninth grade, the meetings moved to a closed-door “mindfulness room” for Friday lunches. Communications shifted to district email and Google Docs when access to Remind was curtailed. In March 2025, the mother discovered the teacher actively typing “extremely sexually graphic content” into a shared Canva document with her daughter. She recorded it. She called the Butler County Sheriff’s Office. 

The district’s response, according to the lawsuit, was to promise administrative leave and restricted access to technology, then quietly allow the teacher to take Family and Medical Leave Act leave instead. Less than two weeks after the explicit messages surfaced—and while investigations by the district, sheriff, and children’s services were still open—the district approved his retirement. No public discipline. No immediate report to the Ohio Department of Education, as many parents would expect. The teacher walked away with his pension and benefits intact while the family was left to pick up the pieces. 

The superintendent, Ashley Whitely, issued the standard institutional denial: the district “denies all allegations” and claims student safety is its top priority.  Meanwhile, the mother’s lawsuit also details earlier reports she made that went unaddressed, repeated class pull-outs without parental notification, and even troubling lapses in how the school nurse handled the student’s medication—stockpiling Tylenol that contributed to a suicide attempt and failing to manage anxiety medication on a trip properly. These are not small administrative hiccups. They paint a picture of a system that had multiple opportunities to intervene and chose not to.

Then there is the part that really bothers me. According to people who have followed the internal handling, the HR director—Jeff Rouff—essentially shrugged and said something to the effect that the age of consent in Ohio is 16, so what’s the big deal? Two consenting adults. Nothing illegal happened. That line of thinking is exactly why these situations metastasize. It ignores the entire grooming process that began at 13, when the girl was under the care and authority of this adult in a position of power inside a public school building. It ignores the use of school-issued devices and district apps to conduct the relationship. It ignores the closed doors, the missed classes, the emotional manipulation of a vulnerable child who had already suffered prior sexual abuse. Age of consent statutes were never intended to give cover to adults in positions of trust who spend years cultivating access to minors. That is not a gray area. That is the precise reason we have laws and professional conduct codes for educators in the first place.

I heard about problems surrounding this teacher roughly a year before the lawsuit dropped. Other parents and observers had been talking. The circle had already started to form. When the story finally broke across local media—Channel 5, Local 12, FOX 19—the superintendent’s immediate public move was not a somber address about accountability and root-cause fixes. It was a cheerleading video hyping the fall, talking about hiring dozens more staff members, rolling out a corporate “roadmap” with “stakeholders,” and reminding everyone to keep supporting public schools. The timing felt deliberate. Distract. Reassure the taxpayers who write the checks. Keep the money flowing.

That is the game I have been describing for years. Lakota, like many large suburban districts, is constantly in or approaching levy mode. The narrative must be controlled: we are great, we are improving, we need a little more of your property tax money to keep doing the wonderful things we do. Bad stories—especially stories that suggest adults in the building are preying on children and that leadership circled the wagons—threaten that narrative. So the wagons circle. The teacher retires quietly. HR offers the age-of-consent talking point. The superintendent films the upbeat video. The teachers’ union, which exists in large part to protect its members from consequences, stays largely silent or issues the usual generic statements about due process. And the machine keeps turning.

This is not an isolated incident. The lawsuit itself references a pattern of other cases involving Lakota employees over the years—some that resulted in convictions or license revocations, others that were handled with quiet exits.  Former board member Darbi Boddy, who has remained a vocal parent advocate even after her time on the board ended, issued a clear public statement criticizing the handling of this situation. Good for her. We need more people willing to say the obvious out loud rather than hide behind “stakeholder engagement” jargon.

What troubles me most is how predictable the protection response has become. When something like this surfaces, the institution’s first instinct is not “How do we make sure this never happens again and how do we support the victim?” It is “How do we contain the damage to our brand and our funding pipeline?” The HR director’s reported comment about 16 being legal is a perfect example of that mindset. It treats the endpoint—the moment the child turned 16—as the only thing that matters, while erasing the years of grooming and boundary erosion that got her there. It treats a minor student in a teacher’s care as just another “consenting adult” the second the calendar flips. That is not how any responsible adult in education should think. It is how an institution thinks when its primary loyalty is to itself and the revenue stream that sustains it.

Public education in its current monopolistic, union-protected, tax-funded form has structural problems that make these failures almost inevitable. When you combine compulsory attendance, massive budgets, powerful collective bargaining agreements that make firing even grossly negligent employees difficult and expensive, and a culture that treats any criticism as an attack on “the children” or “public education itself,” you create exactly the conditions for cover-ups. The money keeps coming in as long as the bad stories stay buried or get spun. Parents who raise concerns are dismissed as “haters” or people with “unrealistically high moral standards.” Meanwhile, the actual standard on the ground—don’t have sex with kids in the classroom or via school devices, don’t groom them for years, don’t let it slide when a parent reports it—somehow becomes negotiable the moment it threatens the budget or the reputation.

I am not saying every teacher is doing this. The vast majority are not. But the ones who are counting on the system’s reluctance to act decisively. They count on the HR director who will find the legal technicality to keep them safe from judgment. They count on the superintendent who will film the upbeat video instead of cleaning house. They count on the union that will fight to the last dollar of taxpayer money to protect a member who should never have been in a classroom with minors. And they count on enough parents staying disengaged or intimidated for the story to fade before real accountability arrives.

The mother in this case did what too few parents feel empowered to do: she documented, she reported, she refused to let it disappear. Her lawsuit is now public. The allegations are serious and detailed. Whether every claim is ultimately proven in court is for the legal process to decide. But the pattern of institutional response—quiet exit, legal denials, distraction videos, and the age-of-consent shrug—is already on display for anyone willing to look. That pattern should alarm every parent in Lakota and in any district that operates the same way.

How many other kids right now are in unhealthy dynamics with adults who hold power over their grades, their schedules, their daily lives inside these buildings? How many school-issued devices are carrying messages that would make any decent parent’s blood run cold if they saw them? How many times has a concerned parent been told some version of “nothing to see here, move along, and please vote yes on the next levy”? I would be willing to bet the number is higher than any of us want to admit. This case only became a story because one mother refused to be quiet. The rest stay invisible because the system is optimized for exactly that outcome.

We keep being told that more money, more staff, more programs, and more “roadmaps” will fix what ails public education. I have watched this play out locally for years. The money keeps increasing. The problems—academic stagnation in too many areas, cultural capture, and now these horrifying failures of basic child protection—persist or worsen. At some point, parents have to ask whether the institution itself is the problem, not the lack of funding. When the first instinct of leadership is to protect the adult and the budget rather than the child, the social contract has already been broken.

I have said it before, and I will keep saying it: these schools should not be connected to public dollars through collective bargaining agreements that shield misconduct this way. The current model creates perverse incentives. It rewards circling the wagons. It punishes transparency. And the kids pay the price—sometimes in ways that can never be fully repaired.

If you are a parent in Lakota or anywhere else, pay attention to what is happening here. Read the lawsuit. Watch what the district actually does versus what it says in the carefully produced videos. Talk to your kids. Monitor the devices. Show up at meetings. Ask the uncomfortable questions. And recognize that the people telling you everything is fine and you need to keep writing bigger checks may have priorities that do not align with protecting your child.

This story is not going away. The mother made sure of that by filing in federal court. Good. Sunlight is still the best disinfectant, even when the institution would prefer the lights stay off.

Footnotes

1.  Details of the federal lawsuit filed July 1, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, as reported in contemporaneous coverage by the Cincinnati Enquirer and Journal-News.

2.  Allegations regarding the timeline, use of the Remind app, Canva document, mindfulness room meetings, and district response drawn from the complaint were summarized in multiple local outlets.

3.  District statement denying allegations and emphasizing student safety priorities, reported across local media following the lawsuit filing.

4.  References to prior incidents and pattern allegations contained within the 2026 lawsuit filings and prior local reporting on other Lakota employee cases.

5.  Ohio age of consent is 16; however, professional conduct codes for educators and laws regarding persons in positions of authority create additional prohibitions on sexual conduct with students that do not turn solely on the general age of consent.

Bibliography for Further Reading

•  Cincinnati Enquirer, “Parent says Lakota teacher groomed and abused her daughter,” July 8, 2026. 

•  Journal-News, “Lawsuit: Lakota teacher ‘groomed and sexually abused’ a student and was allowed to take medical leave, retire,” July 7, 2026 (updated July 9). 

•  FOX19 / Local 12 coverage of the July 2026 lawsuit and related statements.

•  Ohio Department of Education professional conduct standards for educators (ongoing reference for context on boundaries and reporting obligations).

•  General resources on educator sexual misconduct patterns: U.S. Department of Education reports and studies on employee misconduct in K-12 settings (searchable via ED.gov).

•  Local coverage of prior Lakota cases involving Justin Dennis and others referenced in the 2026 lawsuit for pattern context.

•  Darbi Boddy’s public statements and commentary on Lakota issues (available via local media archives and her public channels).

•  Ohio Revised Code sections on sexual battery, unlawful sexual conduct with a minor, and school employee reporting requirements.

Rich Hoffman

More about me

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

About the Author: Rich Hoffman

Rich Hoffman is an author, political consultant, and strategic advisor based in Cincinnati, Ohio, and the creator of The Politics of Heaven—a unique framework that connects biblical theology, ancient history, and modern power structures to explain how moral alignment and spiritual forces shape global events. Blending real-world political experience with deep research into archaeology, UFO phenomena, and suppressed historical narratives, Hoffman offers compelling commentary on topics ranging from ancient civilizations and the Dead Sea Scrolls to modern populist movements, paranormal continuity, and leadership strategy in chaotic environments. As the author of The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business and the forthcoming Politics of Heaven, he brings a grounded yet provocative voice to media discussions, supported by firsthand experiences and a cross-disciplinary approach that bridges science, history, and theology. For interviews, speaking engagements, or expert analysis, visit richhoffmanbooks.com or contact directly via phone at 513-307-5815 or email at rhoffman@richhoffmanbooks.com.  If you’ve seen the movie, Disclosure Day and want to talk about it and the implications of Presidnet Trump’s UAP disclosures, let me know and we can bring some color to your coverage. https://richhoffmanbooks.com/media-inquiries-broadcast-topics-and-contact-info/?frame-nonce=ad51e7ecba I do have a firsthand UFO encounter to discuss.

Lakota Schools Never Learns: New Superintendent Ashley Whitely is more of the same past failures–ask for more tax money, and teach kids Democrat politics

Public education in the United States stands as one of the most entrenched institutions of modern civilization, yet its fundamental design reveals a profound misalignment with human nature and family sovereignty.[^1] For centuries, the transmission of knowledge, values, and skills occurred primarily within the family unit, reinforced by community and society as supportive extensions rather than replacements. Compulsory schooling, modeled after 19th-century Prussian systems and imported into America through reformers like Horace Mann, shifted this dynamic dramatically. Children were removed from the familial hearth—where organic, personalized mentorship could flourish—and placed into centralized social hierarchies designed to enforce conformity, pecking orders, and state-approved narratives. This model, while promising universal literacy and opportunity, has instead fostered dependency, ideological indoctrination, and fiscal inefficiency. As John Taylor Gatto argued in his seminal critique The Underground History of American Education, the system was never primarily about empowerment but about social control and workforce standardization.[^2]

Nowhere is this misalignment more evident than in suburban districts like Lakota Local Schools in Butler County, Ohio—the largest suburban public school system in southwest Ohio, serving approximately 17,887 students across 22–23 schools in West Chester and Liberty Townships.[^3] Located in the greater Cincinnati area, Lakota exemplifies the carbon-copy problems plaguing districts nationwide: escalating property tax burdens, bloated administrative layers, union-driven wage spirals, and a progressive ideological tilt that often prioritizes social engineering over academic excellence and parental authority. Residents like those in nearby Middletown, Ohio, witness these issues firsthand, as similar patterns repeat across Hamilton and Butler Counties. The district’s recent leadership transition and repeated levy defeats offer a microcosm of why the public education model is fundamentally broken—and why resistance through low-tax advocacy and school choice represents the path forward.

At its core, effective education marries parental responsibility with societal support, not the reverse. Removing children from the family for seven to eight hours daily, five days a week, severs the natural bonds of mentorship and moral formation. Teachers, once envisioned as extensions of the home, have become agents of a bureaucratic “social order” where students navigate artificial pecking orders—cliques, grade-point competitions, and now identity-based hierarchies—rather than real-world apprenticeships. This detachment has proven devastating: declining test scores, rising mental health crises, and generational alienation from parental values. Progressive education, amplified since the 1960s, has accelerated the divorce of children from family, promoting platforms that emphasize state-defined equity, gender fluidity, and partisan activism over timeless skills like reading, math, and critical thinking rooted in heritage.[^4]

Critics across the political spectrum—from libertarian school-choice advocates to traditionalists—note that U.S. public schools consume over $800 billion annually nationwide yet produce outcomes inferior to many peer nations, especially when adjusted for per-pupil spending.[^5] Ohio’s model, heavily reliant on local property taxes (supplemented by state aid), exacerbates inequities tied to ZIP codes. Funding follows geography, not merit or parental demand. The result? Districts like Lakota operate as monopolies, insulated from market pressures. True reform demands detaching funding from residence: vouchers, education savings accounts, open enrollment, and charter expansion. Parents, not bureaucrats, should direct resources to institutions that deliver value—whether traditional public, private, homeschool, or hybrid. Lakota’s story illustrates why clinging to the status quo fails both fiscally and culturally.

Lakota’s fiscal narrative is one of repeated tax extraction attempts met with growing taxpayer fatigue. The district’s last successful operating and permanent improvement levy passed in 2013, intended as a five-year measure but stretched to 15 years through pressure management and economic conditions.[^6] It funded operations amid post-recession recovery, but by the 2020s, escalating costs—driven by union contracts, inflation, and administrative bloat—necessitated more. Earlier attempts tell a cautionary tale. In 2011 alone, voters rejected Lakota levies three times in 18 months, reflecting early resistance to millage hikes amid economic uncertainty.[^7] Fast-forward to November 4, 2025: The district placed one of Ohio’s largest school levies ever on the ballot—a $506.4 million bond issue (4.99 mills) paired with a 0.95-mill permanent improvement levy for its Master Facilities Plan. The proposal aimed to demolish, renovate, and consolidate 21 buildings into 16 (including four new elementary schools), promising operational savings, smaller class sizes, enhanced security, and fewer grade transitions.[^8]

Financial details were layered with optimistic projections: State co-funding via the Ohio Facilities Construction Commission would cover 32 percent (roughly $200 million), reducing the effective bond collection to 3.99 mills. An existing 2.28-mill bond roll-off in 2028 would offset much of the hike, yielding a net increase of just 2.66 mills—or roughly $93.10 annually per $100,000 of auditor-appraised home value ($208 gross, delayed collection to 2029). Seniors and low-income disabled residents would see even less (about $68.71).[^9] District leaders, including Treasurer/CFO Adam Zink, framed it as a “last resort” to avoid deeper operating cuts and redirect savings to classrooms. Yet voters delivered a decisive rejection: 61 percent “no” (approximately 60.81 percent to 39.19 percent), one of the starkest defeats in recent memory.[^10]

This was no anomaly. The district’s 12-year streak of balanced budgets (because of declining enrollment through FY2024) masked underlying pressures: staffing costs (predominantly wages and benefits under union contracts), enrollment fluctuations, and state funding volatility.[^11] The 2013 levy’s longevity proved temporary; without new revenue, forecasts warned of shortfalls by FY2028–2029. Superintendent Dr. Ashley Whitely, in a January 2026 interview, conceded another levy is “a matter of when, not if,” signaling plans for a revised, perhaps scaled-down proposal after community input sessions and a ThoughtExchange survey.[^12] This “shell game”—big ask first, retreat to smaller—has become predictable, eroding trust.

The 2025 levy push occurred under new leadership installed amid crisis. Former Superintendent Matt Miller resigned in January 2023 after a tumultuous year. Board member Darbi Boddy and others highlighted allegations stemming from his divorce, detailed in police records: Miller admitted arranging and participating in group sexual encounters with his ex-wife.[^13] A private investigation cleared him of on-the-job misconduct or legal violations, but the public spectacle—coupled with claims of board hostility—doomed his tenure. Miller had positioned himself as a progressive exemplar, yet the revelations shattered that image.[^14]

In May 2024, the board hired Dr. Ashley Whitely as Superintendent/CEO, effective August 1, 2024. A former Lakota East English teacher and department chair (five years in-district), plus assistant superintendent at Wyoming City Schools, Whitely brought local roots and a “proven track record” in professional development and community partnership.[^15] Her vision, outlined in district messages and the “Let’s Go Lakota!” video series, emphasizes “Building OUR Future…One Piece at a Time,” the E + R = O performance pathway (Events + Responses = Outcomes), a staff-co-created Culture Blueprint, and over 100 listening sessions. She champions the Master Facilities Plan for safety, programming, and efficiencies.[^16]

Initial hopes for reform—perhaps embracing competition via open enrollment or market-driven efficiencies—faded quickly. Whitely’s role evolved into levy cheerleader, promoting the 2025 ballot as essential for “redirect[ing] dollars toward academics.” Post-defeat, she solicits input on facilities but insists on future tax measures.[^17] This aligns with the district’s pattern: Administrators for administrators. National Center for Education Statistics data shows 5 district-level administrators, 49 school administrators, 76 administrative support staff, and total FTE staff of roughly 1,988 (including about 729 teachers) for 17,500-plus students.[^18] Total headcount exceeds 2,061. Salaries reflect this top-heaviness: Former Superintendent Miller earned $199,639 (2023 peak); current structures project assistant superintendents up to $165,000-plus.[^19]

Critics, including new board member Benjamin Nguyen (elected 2025 alongside incumbents), highlight the mismatch with private-sector accountability. Unlike CEOs who scale operations amid market shifts, Lakota’s leadership maintains escalating wages, refuses workforce reductions despite declining enrollment trends in some areas, and layers bureaucracy. The “famous” salary transparency reports (local analyses comparing Lakota admins to regional peers) have long shown disproportion—often exceeding governors’ pay or comparable private roles—yet little reform follows.[^20]

Lakota’s budget—predominantly staffing (teachers and classified unions under contract)—grows unchecked. Five-year forecasts assume wage hikes, new programming for state report cards, and no scaling despite efficiencies promised in the failed Master Facilities Plan.[^21] Too many administrators oversee administrators; summer-heavy schedules (nine-month operations for many) yield high per-day costs. Property taxes fund this while state models collapse under pension liabilities and mandates.

Worse, cultural drift compounds the issue. Public schools nationwide increasingly insert progressive curricula—gender ideology, pronoun policies, CRT undertones—divorcing students from parental authority. While Lakota has removed some problematic materials and adopted neutral policies under board pressure, the broader model recruits youth toward statist loyalty rather than family-centric independence. Teachers’ unions, dominant in negotiations, prioritize compensation over innovation. The “free babysitting” value proposition of yesteryear—drop kids off, secure college/job outcomes—has evaporated amid rising costs, ideological conflicts, and mediocre proficiency (69 percent in core subjects per state metrics).[^22]

Voters recognize the scam: Levies no longer “invest” but subsidize inefficiency. The 2025 defeat echoed taxpayer weariness after decades of escalation. Economic illusions of endless growth once masked the burden; now, with inflation, remote work, and housing costs, resistance grows. Low taxes foster community vitality—business attraction, population retention—far more than shiny facilities. As one analysis notes, districts failing levies often thrive via market adaptation; Lakota’s monopoly mindset persists.[^23]

True CEOs innovate. Lakota should pursue open enrollment aggressively, attracting students (and per-pupil state aid) from underperforming districts. Detach funding from ZIP codes via Ohio’s expanding voucher/EdChoice programs. Embrace hybrid models, reduce admin layers (target fewer than 40 total), benchmark salaries privately, and cut non-essential staff. Competition would force excellence: Lower “prices” (effective tax cost per outcome), higher value.

School board members like Nguyen offer glimmers of accountability. Anti-levy organizations and citizen groups—doing the oversight boards often neglect—have proven more valuable than cheerleaders. Ohio’s property tax reliance is unsustainable; broader reforms (income-based or choice-driven funding) loom.

Nationally, districts adopting choice outperform monopolies. Florida and Arizona models demonstrate gains without endless bonds. Lakota could lead by proving smaller government yields better education.

Dr. Ashley Whitely’s tenure, like predecessors’, risks perpetuating the cycle: Cheerlead taxes, ignore marketplace realities, double down on bureaucracy. The 2025 defeat and her “matter of when” stance confirm no learning occurred. Yet community pushback—rejecting the $506 million ask—signals maturity. Low taxes and fiscal restraint build stronger neighborhoods than lavish, ideologically captured schools.

Public education’s inception promised uplift; its execution delivered dependency. Lakota proves the thesis: Family teaching, societal backup, and competitive choice outperform removal and regimentation. Voters must sustain resistance until leaders adapt—or parents exit via choice. The next levy attempt will test this resolve. History suggests defeat again, until the model evolves. Residents owe it to future generations to demand better: Not more spending, but smarter, freer education.  And the new superintendent at Lakota schools is just more of the same failure-based education approach that nobody likes, and is poised to change dramatically in the times to come.

Over the past decade, the consistent rejection of new school levies in the Lakota Local Schools district has functioned as an informal tax‑stabilization mechanism. When a district of Lakota’s size goes twelve-plus years without a new operating levy, the cumulative savings for homeowners and businesses become enormous. A single failed levy—typically in the range of 5–7 mills—can represent millions of dollars per year that remain in private hands. Spread across more than 110,000 residents and tens of thousands of parcels, the avoided tax burdens since 2013 likely total hundreds of millions over the decade. For most families, that means thousands of dollars that stayed in their household budgets; for businesses with larger property footprints, it means tens of thousands saved per year that could instead be invested in hiring, equipment, or expansion.

The opportunity cost dimension may actually be the most important. Property‑tax‑resistant communities often grow faster because stable taxes encourage residential investment, business development, and long‑term homeownership. West Chester and Liberty Township have repeatedly been cited as among the fastest‑growing and most competitive economic corridors in Ohio—not in spite of tax restraint, but largely because of it. Keeping levy pressure low increases disposable income, which boosts retail, construction, restaurants, and small business dynamism. Over a decade, that economic flywheel compounds: more residents, more businesses, more payroll, and more value creation than would have existed under a heavier tax regime.

There’s also a governance value created by tax resistance. When levies fail, districts are forced to prioritize, modernize operations, and seek non‑tax solutions to structural problems. Lakota’s delayed levy cycle has pushed administrators—Miller previously, and now Dr. Whitely—to be more transparent, more financially innovative, and more accountable to the public. That pressure often leads to leaner operations, better auditing, and a clearer articulation of needs versus wants. From a community perspective, that’s a form of economic value too: it disciplines public institutions to behave more like private ones, where efficiency isn’t optional.

Taken together, the anti‑tax presence in the Lakota district hasn’t just saved residents money—it has shaped the character of Butler County’s growth. Lower tax burdens helped produce one of the most economically vibrant suburban regions in the state, attracting investment and stabilizing property markets even during volatile national periods. The savings are measurable, but the long-term community value—strong growth, predictable tax environments, and a business‑friendly climate—is the larger legacy.

Footnotes

[^1]: Based on historical analysis of Prussian compulsory education models adopted in the U.S. during the 19th century.

[^2]: John Taylor Gatto, The Underground History of American Education (New York: Oxford Village Press, 2000).

[^3]: Lakota Local School District official enrollment data and National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) district profile, 2024–2025.

[^4]: See critiques in progressive education history, including works by Diane Ravitch and E.D. Hirsch Jr. on curriculum shifts since the 1960s.

[^5]: U.S. Department of Education and OECD PISA comparative spending/outcome reports, latest available cycles.

[^6]: Lakota Local Schools historical levy records and Ohio Department of Education financial reports.

[^7]: Journal-News (Hamilton, Ohio) coverage of 2011 levy elections.

[^8]: Lakota Local School District Master Facilities Plan documents and ballot language, September 2025.

[^9]: Lakota “Financial Facts Behind the 2025 Ballot” publication and auditor’s office millage calculators.

[^10]: Official election results from Butler County Board of Elections, November 4, 2025, reported by WLWT and Cincinnati Enquirer.

[^11]: Lakota five-year financial forecasts submitted to Ohio Department of Education, FY2024–2029.

[^12]: Cincinnati Business Courier interview with Dr. Ashley Whitely, January 2026.

[^13]: Police records and board meeting minutes referencing Miller’s resignation, January 2023.

[^14]: Cincinnati Enquirer and Journal-News reporting on the investigation and public fallout.

[^15]: Lakota Local Schools board announcement and Cincinnati Enquirer, May 4, 2024.

[^16]: District “Let’s Go Lakota!” communications and superintendent message archive on lakotaonline.com.

[^17]: Post-election statements and ThoughtExchange survey updates from Superintendent Whitely.

[^18]: NCES Common Core of Data, Lakota Local School District staffing tables, 2024–2025.

[^19]: OpenPayrolls.com and Lakota salary schedules, 2023–2025 data.

[^20]: Local salary comparison reports circulated in Butler County media and taxpayer analyses.

[^21]: Lakota five-year forecast assumptions and board budget documents.

[^22]: Ohio State Report Card metrics for Lakota Local Schools, latest proficiency data.

[^23]: Comparative studies on levy-failure districts by EdChoice and Ohio Auditor of State performance audits.

Bibliography for Further Reading

Cincinnati Enquirer. “Lakota Local Schools names Ashley Whitely as its superintendent.” May 4, 2024.

Journal-News. Coverage of 2011–2025 levy attempts and Miller resignation.

Lakota Local School District. Master Facilities Plan financial documents and superintendent messages (lakotaonline.com).

National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). Lakota Local District Detail, 2024–2025.

Ohio Department of Education. School district financial forecasts and report cards.

WLWT / WVXU. Election results and levy coverage, November 2025.

Cincinnati Business Courier. Whitely interview on future levies, January 2026.

OpenPayrolls.com. Lakota employee salary database.

Gatto, John Taylor. The Underground History of American Education.

EdChoice.org and Ohio Auditor of State reports on vouchers, choice, and district audits.

Rich Hoffman

More about me

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

About the Author: Rich Hoffman

Rich Hoffman is an independent writer, philosopher, political advisor, and strategist based in the Cincinnati/Middletown, Ohio area. Born in Hamilton, Ohio, he has worked professionally since age 12 in various roles, from manual labor to high-level executive positions in aerospace and related industries. Known as “The Tax-killer” for his activism against tax increases, Hoffman has authored books including The Symposium of JusticeThe Gunfighter’s Guide to Business, and Tail of the Dragon, often exploring themes of freedom, individual will, and societal structures through a lens influenced by philosophy (e.g., Nietzschean overman concepts) and current events.

He publishes the blog The Overmanwarrior (overmanwarrior.wordpress.com), where he shares insights on politics, culture, history, and personal stories. Active on X as @overmanwarrior, Instagram, and YouTube, Hoffman frequently discusses space exploration, family values, and human potential. An avid fast-draw artist and family man, he emphasizes passing practical skills and intellectual curiosity to younger generations.

Teachers Making Zombies in Lakota Schools: The ICE protests reveal a deeper, darker problem

The recent student protests against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) at Lakota Local Schools in Butler County, Ohio, exemplify a broader and deeply troubling pattern in American public education. On February 12, 2026, students at Lakota East and Lakota West high schools walked out of classes during school hours, marching and carrying signs in opposition to ICE’s immigration enforcement actions and the treatment of immigrants. Reports indicate that at Lakota East, the walkout began around 1 p.m., with students leaving classrooms to demonstrate. These events were part of a wave of similar student-led demonstrations across the Tri-State area and nationwide, often framed by media and school officials as spontaneous expressions of youthful concern over federal policies.

Yet a closer examination reveals questions that demand answers: If these were truly student-initiated movements driven by genuine adolescent passion for immigration issues, how did high schoolers—many too young to vote or fully grasp complex policy debates—come to adopt such uniformly radical left-wing positions? Where did they acquire the ideological framework to view ICE enforcement as inherently unjust, to chant against law enforcement, or to equate border security with oppression? The evidence points overwhelmingly not to parental influence or organic self-education, but to a systemic infusion of progressive ideology within the public school environment itself, facilitated and encouraged by teachers, administrators, and union-aligned staff.

Public schools, funded by taxpayer dollars, are legally and ethically obligated to remain politically neutral. School boards are intended to be non-partisan, and classrooms should present balanced perspectives on history, government, and current events. Instead, what we observe in districts like Lakota is a pattern where left-leaning views dominate. Teachers, often represented by powerful unions with progressive platforms, shape curricula, discussions, and even extracurricular activities to emphasize one side of the political spectrum. Students hear repeated narratives praising figures like Barack Obama, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, or Bernie Sanders, while conservative viewpoints—rooted in rule of law, national sovereignty, or traditional values—are marginalized or absent. History classes may highlight speeches from Democrat leaders but rarely balance them with opposing arguments from figures emphasizing constitutional limits on federal power or the importance of secure borders.

This ideological imbalance is not accidental. It reflects broader trends in teacher preparation programs, hiring practices, and professional development, where progressive ideologies are normalized. Administrators, to advance in their careers, often align with these prevailing views; dissenting voices risk being labeled as disruptive or “right-wing.” In such an environment, vulnerable adolescents—navigating identity formation, peer pressure, family conflicts, or rebellion against authority—become receptive to messages that position teachers as enlightened alternatives to “strict” or “outdated” parental guidance. A student grounded at home for misbehavior, resentful of church attendance, or frustrated with family rules finds validation in a classroom where authority figures affirm that systemic injustices (like immigration enforcement) justify defiance.

The Lakota ICE protests illustrate this dynamic starkly. Students carried pre-made signs and marched during school hours, actions that typically require coordination and tacit approval. Reports suggest teachers permitted or even facilitated sign-making in classrooms, despite principal statements denying involvement. No widespread punishments followed for truancy or disruption—administrators cited free speech protections under Supreme Court precedents like Tinker v. Des Moines (1969), which allows student expression unless it substantially disrupts the educational process. Yet the absence of meaningful consequences speaks volumes: it signals endorsement or at least tolerance from a workforce insulated from accountability. When students feel entitled to leave class for political activism without repercussions, it reveals a culture where progressive causes trump academic priorities.

This is not isolated to Lakota. Nationwide, similar anti-ICE walkouts have occurred, with varying degrees of adult facilitation. In some districts, teachers openly encouraged participation; in others, parents or organizers aided logistics. The pattern echoes historical efforts to use youth as proxies for ideological agendas, from the KGB-influenced campus protests of the 1960s hippie movement to color revolution tactics employing young activists as shields. Adults—particularly those in positions of influence over impressionable minds—hide behind “student-led” rhetoric to advance views they cannot openly espouse without professional risk.

Compounding this is the erosion of trust in the teacher-student relationship. Public schools have seen too many cases of boundary violations, including sexual misconduct. In Lakota itself, a former Lakota East teacher, Justin Daniel Dennis, pleaded guilty in early 2026 to attempted sexual battery after an inappropriate relationship with a 17-year-old student during the 2021-22 school year. Such incidents, while prosecuted when reported, occur with disturbing frequency across districts—often underreported or quietly resolved. If a teacher can manipulate a vulnerable student into a sexual relationship through grooming and authority, it is not a stretch to see parallel manipulation in the political realm: filling ideological voids with radical views, turning students into unwitting advocates for defunding ICE, police reform, or other left-wing priorities.

These vulnerabilities stem from broader societal and familial factors. Many students come from homes with inconsistent structure, where parents may lack confidence in imparting values or face their own stresses. Progressive teachers exploit this void, presenting themselves as allies against “oppressive” conservative norms. The result: a minority of activated students become mouthpieces for adult agendas, protesting on behalf of causes like open borders or sanctuary policies—issues far removed from typical teenage concerns like sports, dating, or social media.

Critics may argue that youth naturally gravitate toward idealism and social justice. Yet the uniformity of the messaging—always left-leaning, rarely balanced—suggests curation rather than spontaneity. True education equips students with facts from all sides: the economic costs of unchecked immigration, the rule of law’s role in sovereignty, historical precedents of secure borders benefiting societies. Instead, one-sided exposure fosters entitlement and division, pitting children against parents, communities, and lawful institutions.

This dynamic mirrors historical socialist movements. Adolf Hitler’s National Socialist German Workers’ Party (Nazis) and Benito Mussolini’s fascism drew from left-wing collectivism, emphasizing state control over individual rights—far removed from classical liberalism, Christianity, or Bill of Rights conservatism. Modern equivalents appear in calls to “defund” agencies like ICE or police, echoing Bernie Sanders or AOC-style democratic socialism. Teachers aligned with these views use public institutions to propagate them, often at odds with the conservative-leaning communities funding them, such as Butler County’s Republican-leaning voters.

Parents who entrust their children to public schools expect neutral education, not indoctrination. When students return home echoing radical slogans, it signals a betrayal: taxpayer-funded employees turning children against family values and community standards. The media, often left-leaning itself, amplifies these “organic” protests while downplaying adult involvement or lack of consequences.

Change requires accountability: transparent curricula audits, balanced instruction mandates, consequences for unauthorized activism, and greater parental oversight. Without it, public education risks becoming a vehicle for ideological capture, eroding trust and fueling the very divisions it claims to heal. Students may one day reflect on these experiences as youthful folly, crediting strong family foundations for pulling them back. But for those without such anchors, the damage lingers—zombified into perpetual activism, detached from reality.

The Lakota protests are a microcosm of this crisis. They were not child-led revolutions but symptoms of adult manipulation in a system that has strayed far from its mission. Until we confront this, public schools will continue losing credibility, funding, and purpose.

Bibliography and Footnotes

1.  WKRC Local 12, “Students at 2 Tri-State schools protest against ICE, treatment of immigrants,” February 12, 2026. Details the walkouts at Lakota East and West during school hours.

2.  Journal-News, “Some local students are organizing protests, campus discussions about ICE enforcement,” February 12, 2026. Covers student emails and planning.

3.  WLWT Cincinnati, “Ex-Lakota East teacher accused of having sexual relationship with student pleads guilty,” January 29, 2026. Covers Justin Dennis case.

4.  Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 393 U.S. 503 (1969). Supreme Court ruling on student free speech.

5.  Butler County Sheriff’s Office reports on Dennis case (2025-2026 filings).

6.  Historical references to Nazi and fascist socialism drawn from standard sources like William L. Shirer, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich (1960), and Jonah Goldberg, Liberal Fascism (2008).

7.  Various reports on nationwide anti-ICE student walkouts (e.g., Guardian, EdSource, 2026 coverage).

Rich Hoffman

More about me

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

Radical Teachers in Lakota Use Students to Advocate Left-wing Politics: ICE protests at taxpayer facilities insult parents

The events at Lakota Local School District in northern Cincinnati, Ohio, on February 12, 2026, represent a microcosm of broader national tensions surrounding student political activism, school administrative responses, potential teacher facilitation, and the influence of progressive ideologies in public education. In a predominantly conservative area of Butler County, students at Lakota East and Lakota West high schools engaged in walkouts protesting U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) policies, including expanded enforcement, raids, and alleged excessive force under the Trump administration. These actions involved students exiting classrooms (at Lakota East around 1 p.m.), marching with signs, chanting slogans against ICE, and positioning themselves visibly along roadsides for media attention. At Lakota West, the protest occurred after school hours and off-campus to limit direct disruption.

Local media, such as WKRC Local 12, reported these demonstrations as student-led responses to federal immigration tactics, noting similar actions across the Tri-State region (Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana). Principals from multiple Lakota schools (including East, West, Hopewell Junior, Liberty Junior, and others) issued a letter to parents on February 11, 2026, preemptively addressing rumors of a “voluntary” walkout. The letter upheld students’ First Amendment rights to peaceful protest and civic expression while warning that unexcused absences would be subject to Ohio law and district policy—participation did not qualify for excused status (e.g., illness, emergencies), and preplanned requests would be denied. It emphasized respect for diverse views, noncoercion, a safe environment, and the requirement to report to the office before leaving the building.

Critics, like me, have labeled the letter evasive, arguing it downplayed administrative or teacher involvement while allowing the event to proceed. Eyewitness observations suggest that protest signs were prepared in classrooms with teacher awareness or permission, and that the walkouts occurred during school hours with limited enforcement. Participants rerouted around obstacles such as snowbanks to remain visible in high-traffic areas (e.g., near I-75), indicating deliberate efforts to maximize impact and media coverage. Coverage portrayed the protests as expressions of community solidarity in a Republican-leaning region, although turnout appeared modest relative to enrollment.

Lakota school board member Benjamin Nguyen publicly opposed the demonstrations, issuing a statement calling non-participants “patriots” and citing crimes by undocumented immigrants. Despite warnings of unexcused absences, many participants reportedly faced minimal repercussions, fueling claims of tacit approval to avoid liability or conflict.

The Nationwide Wave of Anti-ICE Student Protests in Early 2026

The Lakota walkouts aligned with a massive surge of “student-led” demonstrations (organized through teacher union radicalism) across the U.S. in January and February 2026, often coordinated via social media by progressive groups and spurred by intensified ICE operations, including detentions, and tragic incidents like fatal shootings involving agents in Minneapolis. Thousands participated nationwide, with actions in dozens of states and cities.

In the Cincinnati area:

•  Walnut Hills High School: 300–400 students walked out on February 4, 2026, holding signs like “Abolish ICE” in cold weather.

•  Princeton High School: Hundreds walked out on February 10, emphasizing opposition to racial profiling in a diverse student body.

•  Other schools, including the School of Creative and Performing Arts (dozens marching with chants on February 11) and Sycamore High School (tied to January actions), joined the wave.

Elsewhere in Ohio and nationally:

•  Central Ohio districts (Worthington, Hilliard, Upper Arlington) saw January walkouts after ICE’s Operation Buckeye.

•  Northeast Ohio (Cleveland Heights): Hundreds marched on February 12.

•  Other states: Texas (Hutto, Austin, Pflugerville), Kansas (Lawrence, Free State), Utah (multiple Salt Lake County schools with hundreds marching), California (Los Angeles Unified estimating thousands), Minnesota (lawsuits over ICE near schools), and more.

Protests focused on protecting immigrant families, creating “safe spaces,” and opposing overreach. Some districts threatened disciplinary action or investigated facilitation; others remained neutral or supportive. Conservative critics highlight the coordination, media amplification, and involvement of younger students as evidence of external influences beyond organic concern.

Teacher Unions, Political Leanings, and Potential Facilitation of Activism

Central to the controversy is whether these protests were student-driven or amplified by teachers and unions. Public school teachers often lean liberal/Democrat in surveys, and unions like the National Education Association (NEA), American Federation of Teachers (AFT), and Ohio affiliates (Ohio Education Association, Columbus Education Association) have advocated on immigration, condemning ICE near schools, supporting “sensitive locations” protections, and amplifying solidarity efforts.

In 2025–2026, unions pushed for reforms limiting enforcement near educational sites, filed lawsuits (e.g., Minnesota districts and unions), and issued statements opposing ICE actions that create fear in immigrant communities. Ohio unions, such as the OEA, strongly opposed enforcement in or around schools, citing trauma and learning disruptions. Critics argue that this normalizes progressive views in classrooms under the rubrics of “civic education” or “social justice,” potentially pressuring neutral spaces and facilitating activism (e.g., walkout guides or symbolic acts).

In conservative areas like Butler County, public schools are viewed as “liberal incubators” with limited oversight, allowing teachers to instill values diverging from parental ones. Many parents treat schools as convenient childcare, rarely scrutinizing political influences, enabling unchecked messaging. This contributes to generational shifts, with youth adopting radical positions via taxpayer-funded systems.

Implications, Reform Needs, and Long-Term Trajectories

These incidents reveal tensions between student free speech (protected under Tinker v. Des Moines for non-disruptive expression) and school neutrality. If teachers aided protest activities (e.g., by creating signs during class), this raises questions about resource use and impartiality. In polarized regions, such actions appear to leverage youth for adult agendas, thereby eroding trust.

Reform demands include stricter policies on political activities during school hours, transparency in responses, parental oversight, and union accountability. School choice could allow value-aligned options, reducing perceptions of indoctrination. Without reforms, public education risks prioritizing ideology, exacerbating divides, and alienating funding communities.

The Lakota protests, framed as civic engagement, highlight eroding confidence when schools seem to enable partisan activism in conservative strongholds. Balanced, impartial education is essential to serve all families properly.  These protests, as the Lakota one proves, show a much deeper scheme of radical left-wing politics using children to advance their political agendas at taxpayer expense.  It is a mechanism of injustice that must be stopped. 

Footnotes

¹ Local 12 (WKRC), “Students at 2 Tri-State schools protest against ICE, treatment of immigrants,” February 12, 2026.

² Journal-News, “Some local students are organizing protests, campus discussions about ICE enforcement,” February 12, 2026.

³ Cincinnati Enquirer, “Walnut Hills High School anti-ICE walkout draws 300 to 400 students,” February 4, 2026.

⁴ The Guardian, “These are the high schoolers taking a stand against ICE,” February 9, 2026.

⁵ Education Week, “Free Speech Debates Resurface With Student Walkouts Over ICE Raids,” February 5, 2026.

⁶ Ohio Capital Journal, “Central Ohio high school students protest ICE, teacher unions condemn ICE activity near schools,” January 23, 2026.

⁷ American Experiment, “When teachers’ unions turn schools into political stages,” January 21, 2026.

⁸ Chalkbeat, “Growing number of education groups criticize impact of ICE operations on students,” January 28, 2026.

Bibliography

1.  Local 12 (WKRC). “Students at 2 Tri-State schools protest against ICE, treatment of immigrants.” February 12, 2026. https://local12.com/news/local/students-at-multiple-butler-county-cincinnati-ohio-school-schools-walk-out-class-protest-against-ice-immigration-customs-enforcement-agents-officers-president-donald-trump-protesting-politics-political-immigrants-lakota-west-east

2.  Journal-News. “Some local students are organizing protests, campus discussions about ICE enforcement.” February 12, 2026. https://www.journal-news.com/news/some-local-students-are-organizing-protests-campus-discussions-about-ice-enforcement/X6DUPL4VLRCL3OKCKKCP5B6FHA

3.  Cincinnati Enquirer. “Walnut Hills High School anti-ICE walkout draws 300 to 400 students.” February 4, 2026. https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/education/2026/02/04/some-300-to-400-walnut-hills-high-school-students-join-anti-ice-walkout/88510660007

4.  The Guardian. “These are the high schoolers taking a stand against ICE.” February 9, 2026. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/feb/09/us-high-schoolers-protest-ice

5.  Education Week. “Free Speech Debates Resurface With Student Walkouts Over ICE Raids.” February 5, 2026. https://www.edweek.org/leadership/free-speech-debates-resurface-with-student-walkouts-over-ice-raids/2026/02

6.  Ohio Capital Journal. “Central Ohio high school students protest ICE, teacher unions condemn ICE activity near schools.” January 23, 2026. https://ohiocapitaljournal.com/2026/01/23/central-ohio-high-schools-students-protest-ice-teacher-unions-condemn-ice-activity-near-schools

7.  American Experiment. “When teachers’ unions turn schools into political stages.” January 21, 2026. https://www.americanexperiment.org/when-teachers-unions-turn-schools-into-political-stages

8.  Chalkbeat. “Growing number of education groups criticize impact of ICE operations on students.” January 28, 2026. https://www.chalkbeat.org/2026/01/28/education-groups-say-ice-immigration-enforcement-is-hurting-students

Rich Hoffman

More about me

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

Why Lakota Voters Should Reject the Largest School Levy in Ohio History: Vote for Ben Nguyen and listen to my Friend, Jamie Minniear on 55 KRC

In the heart of Butler County, the Lakota School District is asking voters to approve what would be the largest school tax levy in Ohio history—a staggering $506.4 million bond issue paired with a permanent improvement levy. This proposal, if passed, would cost homeowners $208 per year for every $100,000 of appraised property value, with collections beginning in 2029. While district officials claim the net increase will be closer to $93.10 per $100,000 due to retiring debt, the reality remains: this is a massive financial commitment for taxpayers, especially seniors and working families already burdened by inflation and rising costs. The levy’s purpose? To demolish nine existing schools—some only 40 years old—and build four new elementary schools, while reducing the total number of buildings from 21 to 16. But many residents, including Jamie and Todd Minniear, leaders of the No More Lakota Taxes campaign, argue that this plan is fiscally irresponsible and prioritizes construction over classroom needs.

Jamie Minniear, speaking on 55KRC with Brian Thomas, passionately advocated for Ben Nguyen, a 2025 Lakota graduate and conservative school board candidate who opposes the levy. She described Nguyen as a sharp, creative thinker with fresh ideas for education reform and a deep understanding of the district’s challenges. Nguyen’s candidacy represents a new generation of leadership—one that values fiscal discipline, educational outcomes, and community engagement over extravagant spending. Jamie emphasized that the levy is not about improving teacher pay or classroom instruction; it’s about tearing down buildings and replacing them with new ones, regardless of whether they truly need replacement. She and Brian Thomas, the host, recalled his own experience attending classes in trailers and rundown buildings, yet still receiving a quality education. Her point was clear: education doesn’t require luxury—it requires commitment, good teachers, and community support.

The Minniear-led opposition has gained traction by highlighting the lack of transparency and misleading ballot language. While the ballot shows a 5.94-mill increase, the district claims the real impact will be 2.66 mills due to debt roll-off. This discrepancy has confused voters and raised concerns about the district’s communication strategy. Moreover, the district’s plan to reconfigure grade bands, shift students between buildings, and consolidate campuses has sparked anxiety among parents who fear disruption and overcrowding. Critics argue that the district should focus on maintaining existing infrastructure, investing in teacher development, and enhancing academic programs—not launching a half-billion-dollar construction spree. The Ohio Facilities Construction Commission rated many of the buildings slated for demolition as “borderline” or “satisfactory,” further questioning the necessity of such drastic measures.

Ultimately, the levy represents a philosophical divide in the community: between those who believe more spending equals better education, and those who believe in doing more with less. Jamie Minniear and her husband Todd have galvanized a grassroots movement that champions responsible stewardship, local control, and student-centered priorities. Their campaign is not anti-education—it’s pro-accountability. They believe that rejecting this levy is the first step toward a broader conversation about what truly matters in public education. With Ben Nguyen on the ballot and a growing chorus of concerned citizens, Lakota voters have a chance to send a clear message: we support our schools, but we demand smarter solutions. On November 4, vote NO on the Lakota levy!

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

The Lakota Levy of 2025 is Just the First Step: Until there are conservatives on the school board, public schools will seek tax increases

I’m really proud of the interview I did with Senator George Lang just ahead of the election of 2025.  George, first and foremost, is a friend of mine, so I tend not to drag him into things I’m involved in, and when it comes to politics, he and I agree on most everything.  The only significant difference is that he tends to be more considerate of people than I am.  He gives the other side more of a voice than I think they deserve, because he’s a nice guy.  During our interview, when he said that he thinks of Lakota school board members Julie Shaffer and Kelly Casper as friendly people, I disagreed with him.  I think between the two of them at a drunken school board meeting out of town, you couldn’t find enough clothes to half-dress one mannequin in the back of a Dillard’s.  Lakota’s school board is very liberal, and those two individuals lead it, which is embarrassing.  And expensive.  But George is good to everyone.  He has his opinions, but he gives everyone a fair shake, and I often don’t get to show that to people.  Neither does he, as the Majority Whip of Ohio’s Senate, a significant position with considerable influence.  He knows that around me, he can be himself and that I won’t run off and talk about anything that we discuss privately.  It was pretty unique that I got to put him on camera and talk for an hour about everything, from the upcoming Lakota levy to his battles with stage 4 cancer.  However, to clear up some misconceptions people had about George and a donation he was shown giving for the pro-Lakota levy efforts, we conducted an interview together that I think was better than he could have achieved anywhere, by any modern media method, news outlet, or podcaster. 

The only people who do the level of interview at the level of what George and I did were someone like Tucker Carlson or Joe Rogan, and I don’t think either of them could have done a better job.  George and I have known each other for several decades, but we had never sat down and just talked in front of the camera like that. What was captured was very useful to many people who wonder about various things.  I even asked George before the interview, “What’s off limits?  Is there anything you don’t want to talk about?”  He said quickly, “No, nothing, anything, and everything is on the table.”  So, we just talked like a couple of people and let others in to observe, and I was able to show them why I like George so much, even though he has evolved into a powerful politician and a prominent figure in Butler County politics.   And over the course of that interview, which was mainly about the upcoming Lakota levy, the most significant tax increase in the history of Ohio, I think he said a mouthful, which I completely agree with.  We all believe that the Lakota levy is going to crash and burn.  But don’t assume that this wasn’t their plan all along: to give the public a considerable blowout number and lose badly in an election.  Then, to say in the spring or summer that they listened to the public and came back with a reduced number.  Just because we defeated this levy in the 2025 election, it doesn’t mean it won’t come back in some form or another.  These public schools are only known for one thing: wasting tax money and asking the public for more, often on the back of property tax increases, to fund an overly progressive society. 

As George said, he thinks that the Lakota school board and its satellites, which include the treasurer and superintendent, are smart people.  I think what he calls “smart” is very maliciously manipulative, even evil.  But Genghis Khan was considered intelligent too, and so were most of the mass murderers of the world.  People thought that Jeffrey Dahmer was smart, even as he dismembered people in his kitchen and stored their remains in his refrigerator.  I would say that the Lakota school board members are very manipulative, which they have to be, given their liberal leanings.  Because people on the left often have to figure out how to get others to do things for them that they can’t do for themselves, they become pretty skilled at it over time.  However, as George and I reflected, this levy attempt is merely them dipping their toe in the water to see how the public reacts.  The details of that kind of election scope are why I think that interview is better than any other outlet could have pulled off, because we covered a lot of ground that most people would blank out after 15 minutes.  However, what we covered was essential to nearly every living, breathing human being, especially those residing in Butler County, Ohio.  It’s encouraging that in Butler County, an effective resistance to the Lakota tax increases has emerged in the No More Taxes group, which is fighting the Lakota levy.  And there are some really good people involved, and they have raised money not just for this levy, but for several upcoming ones as well.  However, for voters who have to show up and vote, they really need context on the scope of the problem.

So, how do we prevent more tax increases from being imposed in the future?  Well, don’t put liberals on the school board, and right now, there are four solid Democrats.  They call themselves other things to avoid the stigma of not being conservative in Butler County, but they are hard leftists on most policies.  And lefties love to waste money.  So, to stop wasting money, which Lakota already has a quarter of a billion dollar budget for a school, which I argue is just a dressed-up babysitting service, elect conservative school board members.  For this election, Ben Nguyen is the guy.  But in future elections, we need more people like Ben.  You need at least a three-vote majority, which we had for a while at Lakota.  And as soon as we didn’t, Lakota went for a tax increase.  That’s all they know to do—because they are liberals, and because liberals are never smart with money.  They might be manipulative, deceitful, scandalous, or monstrously unprincipled.  But they are spendthrifts who want to live off the efforts of others, starting with the real estate of Butler County.  Once Vivek Ramaswamy is the governor of Ohio next year, and Trump continues to dismantle the Department of Education and unleash the power of School Choice, all the public schools will have to change and do a lot more with less.  Their cost structure is significantly inflated due to their collective bargaining agreements, which stem from their union membership. We are all aware that unions often disrupt cost structures wherever they emerge, as they allow the mediocre to receive disproportionately high incomes.  And that is certainly the case at Lakota schools.  So, yes, the levy will likely fail in a big way on election day, provided people don’t sit on their hands and watch Netflix instead of voting.  People need to go out and vote.  But this is only step one.  People are going to have to dig in and fight to keep our taxes reasonably low until there is a new school board with conservatives on it.  Because, as sure as you are reading this, Lakota is planning the next levy, once the smoke clears from this one, because they have spent themselves into oblivion.  And only higher taxes can satisfy their never-ending hunger for more money to waste.

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

George Lang Donated A Lot of Money to No More Taxes at Lakota: Fighting and beating stage 4 cancer

I’ve known George Lang for a long time, and I would say I know a fighting side of him that a lot of people don’t know about.  And we talked about all those fights as he gave an update on his stage 4 cancer treatment. And to let you know how well it’s going, after we concluded our interview, we made a promise to each other to attend the White House together once the new ballroom opens.  So he’s not planning to die, he expects to beat the cancer thoroughly, and he gave details on just how and what comes next during our discussion.  But speaking of cancers, there was a lot of controversy when his name appeared on a donation list for the pro-levy campaign for Lakota schools, for $2000.  When I first heard about that, I was skeptical, yet his name was there.  I happen to know that George gave at least $2000 to the No More Taxes group opposing Lakota.  So what was going on?  George explained that, too, as best he could.  In the end, he gave $4000 to the No Tax Levy Lakota group and asked the Pro Lakota Levy people for his money back, which they were in the process of doing as we spoke.  I’ve known George for well over two decades, and we’ve talked about that long history and the many fights we’ve both been in over the years.  So I thought it was weird that he would suddenly be for any tax increases.  As it turned out, he very much wanted me to know that it was an accident and that he wasn’t all of a sudden a supporter of higher taxes.  Tax rates are killers of communities, and for his entire life, George has fought high taxes.

No More Taxes!

So the next question everyone has is: how could his $2000 have been an accident?  Wouldn’t he notice a missing $2000?  Well, when I saw it, I thought George was trying to be supportive of Lakota schools because he works with them a lot as a legislator.  One thing in politics is that making enemies isn’t a great way to bring people together.  And as a politician, you are supposed to represent all people, not just your own point of view.  But then again, people vote for you based on your point of view, and they expect you to be authentic.  So right out of the gate, no matter what you do, someone is going to be mad at you.  George has told me for years that I have a lot of talent for politics and has tried to nudge me into several offices, but I have been very resistant, because I reserve the right to throw rocks.  In political theater, there needs to be lots of personalities to test the market of ideas, and we need rock throwers.  But we also need bridgebuilders.  George has always been a bridgebuilder, and I respect him for that.  I have always been a rock thrower.  And he respects me for that.  And we both like a good fight, which is what we have in common.  I figured that if he was donating money to the Lakota levy, there must be a strategic reason, and that he would explain it to me.  I couldn’t imagine what that good reason would be.  But I would be at least open to his explanation.  But as it turned out, he blamed it on his wife, Debbie.  And they get involved in several hundred thousand dollars a year in political donations, and in the amount of that, George didn’t notice the charge on his credit card, because there were so many transactions. 

She voted for the largest tax increase in Ohio’s history!

I’ve known Debbie for a long time too, and I know where her mind is.  She and George give everyone the benefit of the doubt.  I hold grudges forever, and most of the time when people do me wrong, I never forget it.  But Debbie is a loving person.  I could see her playing nice with the Lakota school board.  She and George want to work with the board to make things work well.  Lakota Schools is the largest employer in Butler County, so they aren’t the kind of people to draw lines that they can’t walk out of if they need to.  Knowing both of them, I can’t imagine a scenario in which they accidently voted for a tax increase.  But they give a lot of things, and when it involves that much money, it is possible to get the wires crossed.  George and Debbie have worked very hard for a very long time, and they are very successful.  They didn’t get that way because of politics.  But they have carried their business success into their interest in politics and their desire to make the world a little better through their political involvement.  A lot of us on this Lakota issue see the public school as a vile enemy, teaching children all kinds of terrible things, and wasting a lot of money while doing it.  I am in that camp.  But Debbie’s always hopeful and uses her vibrant personality to build relationships wherever possible.  The important thing to me is that, once they realized where the donation had gone, they worked to correct it, put their money where it counts, and donated against the Lakota levy of 2025. 

A lot of people can’t imagine writing a $2000 check once in their life, let alone writing so many of them that you don’t even notice it on a credit card statement.  And to make sure everyone is clear on the subject, to turn around and give $2000 more to the No Tax Lakota group, in addition to the previous amount.  I say it all the time, politics is a blood sport.  Sometimes you have to be brutal.  Sometimes you want to be nice.  Sometimes you have to be a combination of all kinds of approaches; no one thing works every time for everything.  But when you have been successful for a long time, and survived a lot of battles over the years, which stage 4 cancer is just the latest, resource management can give you all kinds of options.  And what matters is how those resources are managed.  And as soon as he could, George called me and wanted to set the record straight, because he cares about these things.  We spoke for over an hour, about a lot of topics.  And for everything anyone would want to know, the interview with George was great, full of fascinating details.  But even through the fog of politics, which can get hazy at times, I have seen George fight through some really tough moments with his wife, and they are a good team.  They certainly aren’t phonies, which I think makes them very unique, given that they have achieved a lot of success by anybody’s measure with a level of authenticity that many would think wouldn’t be possible.  But I know it’s true.  And we talked about it all.  And I am looking forward to George beating the cancer, to the Lakota levy going down in spectacular flames, and to Trump building that new ballroom.  I think by then we will all have earned a nice night out on the town to see it for the first time.  The White House is a special place, but only because there are special people who have fought in the trenches to make it so.  And George and Debbie Lang are among those who have.  And with their donation to the No More Tax group of Lakota, they are supporting the next generation of fighters, who have a lot of good work ahead of them.  And by the time the smoke clears, we’ll all be proud of the roles we played in that magnificent contest.

Somebody wasted a lot of money on this!

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

Public Schools Were Designed By Dumb People to Make More Dumb People: Dewey always wanted communism

I’ve always been consistent on homeschooling issues; I’ve never thought that the public education system was any good.  In a conversation the other day with some people, they asked me about this, and I always hate answering the question because the essential elements aren’t very complimentary.  The person I was talking to said about themselves, “I’m not very smart, I barely made it through school myself, so I wouldn’t want to harm my kids by teaching them.  I would rather have a professional do it.”  I hate that conversation because it forces you to admit to how stupid most people are, which makes it hard to deal with them willingly.  I don’t have that confidence problem.  I think I can do everything, including working on my car, better than other people and feel better equipped to do it.  Especially teaching my kids.  I think the public education system was set up wrong from the start, and I’ve never been a fan, including in my own school days. I was friends with several honors-type students who were very high-IQ, genius-level students, and I watched how the school leeched off them.  There was nothing for the school to add to their education because all the people teaching those kids were stupid.  And you don’t want to hurt people’s feelings, but usually, people who choose to become school teachers aren’t the best and brightest; otherwise, they would try to make a go of things in the private sector, where they could make a lot of money.  The people who end up teaching are often like the person who was talking to me about public school —they aren’t the brightest our society has to offer.  Neither my wife nor my children finished their senior year of school; they graduated during their junior year.  They did graduate, but they never attended the ceremony, and none of them has ever looked back. 

Government schools are big business. Look how much money was raised by Lakota schools to pass the biggest tax increase in Ohio’s history!

Both of my children spent their senior years traveling Europe to finish their education, and we never sit around wishing they had done anything different.  If anything, we talk about wanting to homeschool them earlier.  A few times during their junior high years, we tried it, but family members really got in the way and were grotesquely unsupportive.  The experience was so bad that we pulled our kids out of school anyway and just finished their education online.  And that was twenty years ago.  There are many more options available now.  We had a close-knit family, so it was hard to ignore their opinions, and back then, those opinions mattered a lot more than they do today.  And, as always, the public school experience —the other kids, the employees, the choice of what to teach—was all constructed by stupid people so that kids can grow up to become more stupid people, and I can’t support that process. Instead, my view of education is that it is far more valuable than the public school system was designed to facilitate.  As I have always said, when John Dewey designed public education, it was made to teach communism.  Not how to teach kids how to think.  And I find it despicable.  I have tried to let other people change my mind, but over time, I have become even more firm in my positions because nobody has ever been able to, even though I have tried to give them the space to do so.  They have never been able to change my mind, even when given more than enough of a fair chance. 

During one of the previous No Lakota Tax campaigns, years ago, the standard teacher’s union complaint has always been classroom sizes, and that was their justification for needing more tax money to hire more teachers to reduce classroom sizes.  I said on the radio, on television, and in public forums that the reason was that the teachers were too lazy to teach a lot of kids, and that all that extra money was essentially to fund laziness.  So they got mad and challenged me to come into the school to teach a class myself so I could find out just how hard it was.  So I went to Lakota East and sat down in one of the classrooms to accept the challenge.  Kids and staff from Spark Magazine, which is a published magazine for the Lakota school system that goes out to a lot of people in a big district full of over 100,000 people, met me to propose the challenge, which they thought I would shy away from at the last minute.  I told them I was ready to teach not just one class, but four at once.  Bring four classrooms into the auditorium, and I would teach them all personally, any subject they wanted to cover, for as long as they could handle.  Now you have to understand that I work an average of 15 hours a day, most days of the week.  And my mind never stops working.  I have been married for more than 37 years and now have grandchildren.  This challenge was about 10 years ago, but I was pretty much the same as I am now.  Teaching a class is something I would call very easy. 

They chickened out because the teachers balked at the proposal.  They didn’t want me to make them look bad, and whenever there has been a public debate on the matter, they never hold up and are easily defeated.  And not to rub salt in the wound, but I have never met a person better equipped to teach any of my children or grandchildren anything, better than me.  And I know a lot of people.  I know a lot of people who think of themselves as brilliant.  And I would say none of them are better at teaching my children anything.  It’s lazy to drop a kid off at school and turn that vital task over to a professional.  So with all that in mind, remember, public schools were designed to teach kids the emerging communism of Karl Marx in those pre-Civil War days.  They were never intended to produce the next generation of geniuses.  And I expect my kids and my grandkids to be the best people they can be.  To elaborate on the point, I will put up some videos here of one of my grandsons and his dad, who have a weekly YouTube channel that I think is pretty neat.   It shows just how important it is to teach a child from a parent, and it’s so much better than the public school experience.  I think that my youngest grandson has a chance to be the next Thomas Edison or Albert Einstein.  The public school system does not make those types of people, and if it were effective, they certainly would.  So if we want people to live up to their full potential, you have to get them as far away from the public school system as possible.  And the truth is, most parents are too lazy to give their kids that chance.  And it’s a shame.  I feel sorry for every kid whose parent is too lazy to homeschool them.  My experience with it is that kids become so much better when they don’t have to endure the corrosive effects of being taught by grown adults to be dumb.  Because public school was designed by communists who wanted to suppress intellect, not expand it, and until we deal with that truth, we will continue to be very disappointed by the results.

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707