Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Policy Review topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Guthrie library board approves revised public‑facing policy after redline review
Summary
After a redline review, the board approved changes that reframe the policy audience for the public, remove procedural detail to a separate manual, update language on removing materials and clarify fines and ILL fee language.
The Guthrie Public Library advisory board voted on May 20 to approve an updated library policy that Director Cameron Smith presented in a redline format and reoriented toward the public.
Smith said she removed procedural content from the policy so the document serves patrons first and staff second, and proposed clearer language for patrons about how to access services. She told the board she removed sections that she judged to be procedural and planned to move those details into a procedures manual.
The board discussed specific revisions. A member pointed out that a heading titled "taking objections to library materials" had been edited to include that patrons "may suggest books or other materials to be removed from or added to" the collection but lacked a clear process for additions. Members agreed to either retitle the section (for example, "patron suggestions for library materials") or explicitly include a simple procedure such as an email to the director or use of an ODL form.
The board also addressed wording for removing materials, where Smith said she would replace industry jargon such as "weeding" or "deselection" with the plain term "removal" to reduce public alarm. The group clarified fines and account standing: patrons owing $5 or more are not in good standing and may be prevented from borrowing, though Smith said patrons may still access public computers unless the policy states otherwise.
Board members debated interlibrary loan (ILL) fees and postage language. Smith said the library has long charged a nominal $3 ILL fee to discourage frivolous requests, noting actual postage can run $4–$6 depending on weight; the board discussed whether to change the published language from "actual postage costs" to a fixed nominal fee or to a higher flat fee such as $4–$5 to better cover average postage.
A motion to approve the policy with the discussed edits was moved, seconded and approved by voice vote. The board directed staff to correct wording issues the group identified (for example, clarifying "good standing" language under fines and payments) and to finalize the redline into a clean, public document for city submission if required.
The policy adoption was approved by voice vote; the director will incorporate the edits and present the finalized version to the board and, as appropriate, to city officials.
