Board Adopts 2026 Library District Schedule amid Calls to Remove Explicit Materials from Youth Sections and Restore Interactive Webinars

The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to adopt the 2026 meeting schedule for the Library District while members of the public urged the board to hold a public hearing on sexually explicit material that speakers said remained in juvenile sections and to restore interactive webinar participation for remote commenters.

Public commenters including Leslie Shepherd, Roger Maya and Kristen Veil told the board the county-funded libraries continued to shelve sexually explicit material in youth sections and that county-run meetings have prevented two-way webinar participation for more than a year. “The board is scheduling another year of silence on an urgent issue,” Roger Maya told the board, asking for at least one public meeting dedicated to library content compliance.

County Manager Jennifer Pekorski replied that materials identified as problematic had been removed from juvenile sections and placed in the adult sections of Maricopa County–run libraries. “Any books that were on juvenile [topic] have been removed from the juvenile section and placed in the adult section of the library in all of the Maricopa County run libraries,” Pekorski said. The chairman also clarified that the county does not have jurisdiction over city-run systems such as the Phoenix Public Library.

Speakers also urged the board to restore interactive webinar participation so residents who cannot travel can speak live. Kristen Veil said the county’s current practice—allowing remote listeners but not remote speakers—has “silenced working citizens, caregivers, and the disabled for an entire year,” and asked that any clerk-authorized edits to the 2026 schedule include a guaranteed option for interactive webinar participation and public explanation for cancellations or reschedules.

The board’s action: A motion to approve the 2026 Library District meeting schedule was made and seconded; the supervisors voted unanimously to adopt it. The vote did not include a specific addition to the schedule to restore interactive webinar participation and public commenters continued to press for a dedicated public hearing on library content compliance.

Why it matters: Public access to meetings and the classification of library materials involve overlapping considerations of First Amendment law, state statute on harmful materials and county-level policy. Citizens asked for greater transparency and a public forum to resolve whether material is appropriately shelved for youth audiences; staff said actions were already taken in county-run branches and reminded the public of jurisdictional limits over city libraries.

Ending: The board adopted the 2026 library district schedule as presented; public callers asked county staff to follow up on specific county branches named by speakers and for the board to consider changes to remote participation policies in future agendas.