Director details how Citrus County libraries classify and shelve books; board asks for rubric for reconsideration reviews

Director Adam Chang told the Library Advisory Board that publishers’ catalog categories and vendor metadata typically define initial classifications for new books, and library staff review those assignments before shelving. Chang said staff look at intended audience, cover design, internal formatting and character ages to place titles; if staff judge a different placement appropriate they reclassify during intake.

Why it matters: several public speakers and a board member raised concerns about why particular titles sometimes appear in certain sections and asked for a transparent process for reconsideration. Board member Leonora Nelson said the board needs a rubric or set of guidelines describing what reviewers should evaluate when a patron files a reconsideration form.

Chang described the practical process: most vendor-supplied records include intended audience tags (picture book, juvenile, young adult, adult). After staff order and receive materials, “books are reviewed by three staff as they come in,” he said, and about 99% of items end up in the expected section. Chang acknowledged some subjectivity and occasional misplacements, and noted the library has a formal reconsideration form patrons may file to request review of a classification or placement.

The director also explained why young‑adult materials often prompt discussion: publishers commonly label young‑adult titles for roughly 12–18 year‑olds; content frequently addresses topics such as grief, relationships, drugs, violence and stronger language as part of targeting older teens. Chang provided circulation context: of roughly 200,000 items checked out year-to-date, juvenile/picture-book circulation accounted for more than 40,000 checkouts while young‑adult accounted for about 5,000 — a small share of total circulation, he said.

Board member Leonora Nelson asked for clear decision criteria — a rubric similar to the grading rubrics she uses as a teacher — so board and staff reviewers can explain why a book is placed where it is. The chair directed Director Chang to prepare a presentation about guidelines and precedents for the board’s June meeting; Chang agreed to bring options and to describe how other library systems handle classification and reconsideration reviews.

Ending: Director Chang said staff will continue to apply vendor data and multi‑staff review when classifying materials and will prepare a follow-up presentation for the June 20 meeting that outlines possible review guidelines and the reconsideration process.