Adi’s attorneys argued being in Boddy’s presence was causing him mental health issues.
The legal wranglings over Boddy’s behavior detailed in legal filings date back to Aug. 16, and some parents have been watching the ruling allowing Boddy to be at the meeting and be heard as a board member closely.
“Since I am a free speech guy, I agree to that,” David Gelb said. “But then that’s why you’re interviewing me, so I can say what I want about them.”
Gelb said that with his free speech, he wanted to tell both Boddy and Adi that their bickering with each other and Boddy’s consistent clashes with school officials are not welcome anymore.
He said his kids’ college aspirations depend on it.
“(Colleges) especially in the state of Ohio, but nationally, see what’s going on in the school district and say ‘Oh, you’re from that school district? You guys are kind of a mess over there.’ That could affect my son’s ability to go to college. He’s a straight ‘A’ student,” Gelb said.
Boddy’s attorney, Robert Croskery, called Judge Howard’s ruling that Boddy could attend the meeting and vote important for representative democracy.
He said that no matter one’s opinion of Boddy or her politics, more than 8,000 people voted for her to represent their values on the board.
“They want her to be their advocate, and she’s doing that,” Croskery said.
Croskery said he would continue to fight the broader protective order and has appealed it in the 12th District Court of Appeals. He indicated he would be willing to take the case to the US Supreme Court if necessary.
“I will take it as far as it is necessary to go to vindicate Darbi Boddy,” Croskery said. “I believe this decision was flawed from the start. I believe it is flawed structurally, it is flawed procedurally, and it is morally outrageous.”
Adi would not comment on the protective order or the reversal of Boddy’s ability to attend meetings, and his attorney, Rob Lyons, didn’t return a phone call or email.
The district provided a statement that read, “Our focus is on our students and their education. Neither the District nor the Board are involved in the protection order, which is a matter between two individual board members. The execution of the order will be up to the courts and law enforcement agencies.”