Orange County School Board members spent substantial time Nov. 6 debating the district's book-challenge policy and whether the superintendent should have authority to temporarily remove or initiate challenges to library materials. The discussion centered on Policy IJL and state processes for removing material identified as "pornographic," "harmful to minors" or "obscene."

General Counsel Palmerini cited the policy language (Policy IJL, subsection 2.b) and said: "Challenge materials may shall not be removed immediately. Such material shall be available for student use pending a final decision. Notwithstanding the foregoing, only the superintendent or designee may temporarily remove a challenged material during the pendency of a request for reconsideration if the superintendent or designee believes it will be disruptive to the student learning environment if the challenged material were to remain available, or if the superintendent or designee determines the material contains *********** or materials that is harmful to minor slash obscene." He described the policy framework for challenges and noted categories that bypass school-level review and go directly to the district literacy council for districtwide decisions.

Several board members said they were concerned that, under current policy and statute, principals and trained media specialists have authority over school library collections and that the superintendent may be limited in removing material absent a state directive or the formal challenge process. "I do not want to be the individual that challenges the books," Dr. Vasquez said; she clarified she would not seek sole authority to act as a challenger but noted concern about how the district responds when the State Department of Education directs removal.

Members split on whether to reopen the policy now. The chair proposed a work session to consider whether the board's review process should be adjusted so the superintendent or designee could act in limited circumstances, and several members asked for a clearer process and more transparency for families and staff. Member Salamanca cautioned that book-policy work sessions can consume substantial board time and said she would prefer to defer unless there was clear urgency; others asked staff to draft possible amendments or to place the matter on a future agenda for clearer public notice.

Ending: The board directed staff to draft language for a work session and to return with proposed options; staff said the superintendent and general counsel would coordinate with communications and bring proposed language back for board review.