Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Library Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board reopens discussion of library policy 109; public speakers urge leaving current opt-out process intact
Summary
Board member led a push to continue work on Policy 109 (library materials), prompting an extended public-comment session in which dozens of parents, teachers and community members urged the board not to reopen the recent policy revision and defended librarians’ work.
Board member Mr. Gillis asked on March 26 whether the board had interest in continuing work on Policy 109, the district library-materials policy adopted in 2023. The board reached a tentative consensus to continue exploring a revision but agreed to delay any first reading while staff completes outstanding work and solicitors are engaged.
Why it matters: The policy governs how the district rates, reviews and removes library materials. The proposed revisit prompted broad public response: more than a dozen residents and district employees spoke during public comment, nearly all urging the board not to re-open the policy and defending the district’s librarians and the existing opt-out process.
Board discussion
Mr. Gillis framed his request as seeking board support to “move forward” on an updated Policy 109. He said the board would not necessarily rush to a first reading and acknowledged the need for solicitor involvement. Several board members recommended postponing formal readings until after budget season and until staff completes the library-review work begun under the prior board.
Public comment
Speakers included parents, former educators, and community volunteers who said the 2023 revision— which introduced a rating system and an opt-out process—should remain in place. Representative public comments included:
- Melissa Cook, a parent and PTO co-president, said parents’ rights rhetoric should not be used to limit library access and urged the board to “focus on how we can support and be there for these kids.”
- Kira Deetz, a high-school student and recent graduate, said teachers—not books—are the reason students have positive memories of the district and warned that limiting materials would harm instruction; she noted only about 1% of parents used the opt-out option last year.
- Several retired teachers and library advocates, including Judy Grove and Katherine Stayman, said the librarians had already spent substantial time reviewing materials and that reopening the policy would force staff to redo work and divert attention from other priorities.
- Other speakers, including Thea Hofstetter and Tamara Lee Bell, urged the board to act to remove certain titles they described as containing sexually explicit material; Hofstetter read a brief excerpt she characterized as pornographic and said such material should not be available to minors.
Board response and process clarity
Board members consistently described the immediate step as a request for consensus about continuing work, not an adoption of specific language. Mr. Gillis said the effort would likely require solicitor input and could include an executive session. Several board members said they favored delaying any first reading until after the current budget process and after staff finishes the review steps begun in 2023. Dr. Nel confirmed that staff had not yet finished all review tasks from the 2023 process.
Ending: The board registered a general consensus to pursue Policy 109 revisions more deliberately, with legal review and additional staff completion of outstanding tasks, and agreed not to hold a rushed first reading at this time. Public commenters urged the board to leave the current policy and opt-out procedures in place and to prioritize district infrastructure and student support work over another policy review.
