Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Library Collection Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press Irving City Council to remove LGBTQIA-themed books from youth section; defenders say books can save lives
Summary
At the Dec. 11 Irving City Council meeting, multiple residents urged the council to move or remove LGBT-themed books from the library’s children’s area, while other speakers defended those titles as life‑saving resources. The council heard public comment but did not take formal action on library policy.
Dozens of residents used the public‑comment period at the Irving City Council meeting on Dec. 11 to press the city and library officials over youth access to LGBTQIA‑themed materials.
John Rockwell, who identified himself as an independent activist, told the council he and others have protested library materials and said the city should “remove perverse pride books from Irving Library.” Luke Malone urged the council specifically to “remove the pride books from the children's section of the Irving Public Library,” and Nathan Kinley and others repeated requests to relocate titles they described as sexually explicit.
Speakers who opposed removal framed their remarks around youth safety and mental‑health concerns. Kim Black told the council that “Books with LGBTQIA characters can give young people hope” and cited suicide‑risk statistics for LGBTQIA youth in support of keeping inclusive materials available. Susan Motley — who said she had come to speak about the city’s ethics code — also told residents “we in Irving have lots of options about the books that we read in our library,” urging civil discourse and procedural solutions.
The public comments included a range of claims and accusations. Kim Black alleged that the Families for Irving PAC influenced library‑board appointments and that a board member, Florie Mallory, had the backing of council allies; that claim was presented as an allegation by a resident rather than as a finding by the council. Other commenters urged revised reconsideration processes and parental controls modeled on practices described in neighboring cities.
Under the Texas Open Meetings Act, council members did not respond during the public‑comment period; the meeting notice and the city’s procedural staff explained that follow‑up, if needed, would be handled by communications or by the appropriate board or staff. No council action to change library policy was taken during the meeting; the remarks were received as public input.
What happens next: The comments were recorded in the meeting minutes and on the public feed; any formal change to library policy would require review by staff, the library board or a future agenda item for council consideration.
