Community protests book‑removal policy as district confirms lawsuits from Education Minnesota and ACLU

Saint Francis Area Schools confirmed at its March 24 board meeting that the district has received lawsuits from Education Minnesota and the American Civil Liberties Union of Minnesota challenging district policy 606.5, and officials said district attorneys are reviewing the filings.

The statement, read at the start of the meeting by the district, said lawyers were reviewing the documents and that “we will not be making any public comments regarding the details of the lawsuits at this time,” adding that there would be no agenda discussion of policy 606.5 that evening.

Why it matters: The policy and its implementation have led to the removal of multiple titles from school libraries and to a local backlash. More than 30 people signed up to speak in the meeting’s public comment period; speakers included students, teachers, librarians, authors and residents who gave conflicting views about whether the district should continue using an external book‑rating website and how decisions about library collections should be made.

Dozens of residents urged the board to return control over selection and challenge processes to local librarians, parents and district officials rather than relying on a third‑party ratings site. Julian Kelcher, senior class president, told the board, “To ban books is to strike away the very heart of what education stands for.” Rhone Anderson, a senior and captain of the speech and debate team, warned that removals had included commonly taught works such as Night by Elie Wiesel and said decisions about curriculum and library holdings should be made locally by elected representatives, parents and trained librarians.

Representatives of the Minnesota Library Association urged the board to follow Minnesota statute 134.51 and to ensure that selection and reconsideration procedures remain led by licensed school library media specialists. A speaker identifying themself as speaking on behalf of that association said school libraries must provide a “robust and representative collection” and that the statute was enacted “to ensure that no single person or group has the unilateral authority to override professional expertise and due process in determining library collections.”

A wide range of other speakers added personal testimony. Beth Peterman, an EL teacher in the district, asked the board to adopt a uniform review rating to prevent explicitly pornographic material from reaching school shelves while preserving committee review of other content concerns. Author statements and readings—some delivered in person, others read on behalf of nationally known writers—warned that removing books disproportionately harms students who lack other access to diverse literature. Khaled Hosseini and other authors (via statements) described letters they have received from students describing the books’ educational and empathic value; author Anne Ursu said the policy outsourced educators’ professional decisions to “anonymous randos.”

Not every public speaker opposed the policy. Shannon Anderson thanked the board for “taking bold steps” to keep age‑inappropriate material out of school libraries and said the board had not enacted a blanket ban but instead sought to keep content age‑appropriate.

What the district recorded as formal action: at the start of the meeting district officials publicly confirmed receipt of the two lawsuits and stated there would be no discussion of policy 606.5 on the agenda that night. The district also said it would answer written inquiries in writing as appropriate.

Clarifying details and context from the meeting: - The district identified the policy at issue as policy 606.5 (library materials policy). - The district confirmed receipt of lawsuits from Education Minnesota and ACLU Minnesota and said its legal team is reviewing the documents. - Meeting staff recorded 33 individuals requesting to speak during public comment. - Several speakers and presenters described a third‑party ratings site (referred to in public comment as BookLooks) as the source used to flag titles; multiple commenters criticized that site as anonymous and lacking professional library credentials. - Minnesota statute 134.51 was cited repeatedly by speakers and advocacy groups as relevant to library selection and reconsideration procedures.

What the board did not vote on tonight: the transcript shows no formal vote to change policy 606.5 during the March 24 meeting. The district said it would not discuss the policy on the meeting agenda that evening because of the pending litigation.

Looking ahead: speakers urged the board to restore local review and reconsideration processes led by licensed library staff, to re‑examine reliance on anonymous third‑party lists, and to follow the procedural safeguards in Minnesota law. District officials repeated that review of the lawsuits is ongoing and that public comment would be answered in writing when appropriate.

Ending: The meeting’s public comment period lasted more than an hour and included students, teachers, librarians, authors and residents calling for both reversal and defense of the district’s approach. The district’s immediate public action was limited to acknowledging the lawsuits and pausing agenda discussion of policy 606.5 while legal review continues.