Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Policy Rules Of Conduct topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board postpones vote on rules-of-conduct revisions after members request clearer language on contagious conditions
Summary
The board reviewed a proposed rules-of-conduct policy that adds guidance on communicable conditions and sleeping; members asked for separate language for skin versus respiratory conditions, staff scripts for awkward conversations, and clearer definitions (e.g., "monopolizing library space"). The vote was deferred until revisions are made.
Get email alerts on the Policy Rules Of Conduct topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
At the May 14 meeting the North Logan library director presented proposed revisions to the library's rules-of-conduct policy, adding guidance for communicable conditions and for patrons who might be sleeping in the facility. Board members questioned the policy's wording and asked for clearer, separate guidance for skin conditions (for example, ringworm, lice) and respiratory illness (coughing), as well as practical scripts staff can use when asking patrons to change behavior or leave.
"We added a section about diseases or contagious things," Bateman said while introducing the revised document, and board members raised concerns about phrasing and scope. Emily Schmidt suggested separating the bullets so that skin conditions and respiratory symptoms are handled distinctly: "Maybe a different bullet point... or a different sentence," she said, arguing that covered-up skin conditions such as ringworm present different risk than someone who is actively coughing. Schmidt and others recommended including examples and a short script to preserve patrons' dignity while protecting others.
Board members also asked the director to clarify vague language such as "monopolizing library space equipment or outlets." Suggestions included setting a time limit for computer or outlet use (for example, two hours) to give staff a clear standard when enforcing the rule.
The board did not vote on the revised policy; members asked Bateman to revise the document to reflect these edits and bring it back at the next meeting.
